HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015/05/04 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
MAY 4, 2015
6:30 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Item
1. 55 min. Polystyrene / Plastic Bag Update
7:25 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes April 20, 2015
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
6. Old Business – None
7. New Business
7a. Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West, LLC, and
RISLP, LLC (TPI Hospitality)
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Assignment and
Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Central Park West, LLC and RISLP,
LLC.
8. Communications -- None
9. Adjournment
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors Introduction & Recap of Year
2b. Recognition of Donation
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting April 13, 2015
3b. Special Study Session Meeting April 20, 2015
3c. City Council Meeting April 20, 2015
3d. Study Session Meeting April 27, 2015
Meeting of May 4, 2015
City Council Agenda
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call
the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which
need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a
Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular
agenda for discussion. The items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda.
Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive
reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda,
or move items from Consent Calendar to regular agenda for discussion.)
5. Boards and Commissions – None
6. Public Hearings -- None
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public -- None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design
Guidelines
Recommended Action: Motion to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending
the zoning ordinance relating to yards, parking, and screening requirements, and to set
the Second Reading for May 18, 2015.
8b. City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt the 2015 Emergency Operations Plan.
8c. Denial of Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License - Thien’s, Inc., dba St. Louis Park Liquor
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution of written findings denying an off
sale intoxicating liquor license to Thien’s, Inc. dba St. Louis Park Liquor for premises
located at 6316 Minnetonka Boulevard.
9. Communications -- None
Meeting of May 4, 2015
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of March 28, 2015 through
April 24, 2015.
4b. Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines.
4c. Adopt Resolution approving the Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment
Contract between Central Park West, LLC and RISLP, LLC.
4d. Designate Sunram Construction the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution
of a contract with the firm in the amount of $859,854.00 for the 2015 Connect the
Park! - Project No. 4015-2000.
4e. Designate Park Construction Company the lowest responsible bidder and authorize
execution of a contract with them in the amount of $3,478,587.99 for the Municipal
State Aid Project Walker / 36th Street – Project #4015-1100 and to Adopt Resolution
authorizing installation of “No Parking” restrictions on 36th Street between Highway
169 and Texas Avenue and on Walker Street from Texas Avenue to Louisiana Avenue
and Adopt Resolution revising stop sign at Walker Street and W. 37th Street.
4f. Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of “No Parking” restrictions on Toledo
Avenue from Wooddale Avenue to 125 feet South of Wooddale Avenue.
4g. Adopt Resolution Authorize Installation of Parking Restrictions along Excelsior
Boulevard at 4811, 4813, and 4815.
4h. Designate Pearson Brothers, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution
of a contract with the firm in the amount of $433,536.88 for Street Maintenance
Project (Sealcoat Streets-Areas 7&8 – Project No. 4015- 1200).
4i. Approve the 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants.
4j Approve a parking lot lease extension for one year with MSP Property Management
(Louisiana Oaks Apartments) to lease 20 parking spaces to accommodate overnight
guests of Louisiana Oaks apartment complex provided a permit is displayed on the
vehicle.
4k. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a Barred Owl mount from Celeste Hill for
Westwood Hills Nature Center.
4l. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes of April 1, 2015.
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV cable channel
17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at
www.parktv.org, and saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in
the lobby of City Hall and on the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon
on Friday on the city’s website.
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Polystyrene / Plastic Bag Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this report and discussion is to provide Council
with the research and suggested process/timeline for making policy decisions on regulating
polystyrene (PS) to-go containers and single-use plastic bags (plastic bags). Staff would also
like to update Council on progress made in achieving the City’s recycling/organics goals.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council support the proposed approach and timeline?
Does the Council have any questions regarding staffs actions related to recycling/organics?
SUMMARY: At the February 23, 2015 Study Session, staff presented goals and objectives for a
targeted education campaign to increase recycling and organics at businesses and multi-family
properties, increase participation in curbside organics program, and reduce use of PS to-go
containers and plastic bags. Council supported moving forward with the plan for increasing
recycling and organics. However, Council wanted to take a stronger approach and asked staff to
determine what would be needed to disallow the use of PS to-go containers and plastic bags in
St. Louis Park, rather than targeted education to reduce use. Council requested that a public
information process be included in this approach. Staff has proposed next steps and created a
timeline for a policy making process on potential PS to go container and plastic bag regulations.
Proposed Next Steps are as follows (note that a more detailed explanation is provided later in this
report):
1. Undertake research – ongoing through May, 2015
2. Study Session discussion – Industry Experts panel – June, 2015
3. Study Session discussion – Check-in on Council direction – June/July 2015
4. Public information process – July through August, 2015
5. Study Session discussion – update on Public Information process and opportunity for
Council to receive public comment from stakeholders – August, 2015
6. Study Session discussion – Staff recommendation on PS/plastic bag policy – Sept, 2015
7. Council policy decision on course of action to take - TBD
8. Implementation - TBD
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable at this time
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Plastic Bag Ban Survey
Prepared by: Kala Fisher, Solid Waste Program Coordinator
Reviewed by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager; Mark Hanson, Public Works
Superintendent; Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Polystyrene / Plastic Bag Update
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: During the February 23rd Study Session, staff identified multiple objectives
that needed to be implemented in order to reach goals of increased business/multifamily
recycling and organics, expand the residential organics program, and evaluate
business/multifamily recycling and organics program performance. Council was in favor of the
recycling and organics objectives identified. However, Council did not support the recommended
approach for reducing polystyrene (PS) to-go containers and single-use plastic bags by
employing education only. Instead of implementing the PS to-go containers and single-use
plastic bag approach as presented, staff was asked to come back with an approach to identify
methods to disallow PS to-go containers and single-use plastic bags, as well as develop a
significant public information process to gather input from public and private stakeholders in
order to shape policy.
Recycling & Organics Objectives Update
• The Solid Waste Communications Group meets regularly and is working on outreach to
businesses and residents to increase organics participation from 11% to 20% by June 2016.
o Staff has promoted the Organics Program at local events: Home Remodeling Fair,
Organic Living Workshop, and STEP Empty Bowls event.
o Social media posts provide information about signing up for Organics, shared a video
on the composting process and promoted the program for Earth Day.
o Yard sign promoting Organics Recycling will be available in May to interested
existing organics customers.
o May activities also include recruiting Organics Champions to promote the program
on their block or in their neighborhood, and distribution of finished compost to
organic recycling program participants.
• Staff is also exploring ideas to improve the Organics Program structure, reduce costs and
expand participation. Staff will approach Council with policy considerations at a later date.
• Staff is working with Hennepin County to identify and reach businesses with a targeted
education campaign and technical resources that will help businesses start/improve recycling
and start an organics recycling program.
o Over 50 St. Louis Park businesses have already been contacted by the County.
o The County has active grants with the following St. Louis Park businesses: Double
Tree Hotel, New Concepts Group, Japs – Olson Company, Park Nicollet Health
Services, and COB, LLC (Hillcrest Development, LLC).
o Staff will attend future site visits with County staff to build relationships in the
community and receive training on providing assistance to businesses.
• Staff is working internally to find ways to work with other city departments to maximize outreach.
o Collaboration with Community Development resulted in promotion of the city’s
residential recycling and organics programs to eligible small businesses, as well as
technical assistance and grant opportunity offerings from the County mentioned in the
recent Small Business Resources brochure. As a result, staff has already been
contacted by three small businesses with requests to implement recycling programs at
their offices.
o Collaboration with Inspections Department resulted in promotional letter sent to over
100 multi-family properties with information on ordering free County resources
offered in multiple languages, applying for the Environmental Partners program to
promote their property, and information on grant funding.
o S.P.A.R.C. April 23, 2015 meeting included speakers promoting recycling, organics,
and reduction of move-out trash at multifamily properties.
Special Study Session Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Polystyrene / Plastic Bag Update
Proposed Next Steps & Timeline – Public Process & Policy Development for PS Containers
and Plastic Bags
Staff is currently conducting research and has developed an approach that will provide
information and options to Council, inform residents and business stakeholders, and collect
feedback from those stakeholders. The proposed next steps will provide Council with policy
recommendations by September 2015.
1. Compile research – Ongoing through May 2015
Staff is researching the various components of policy related to regulation of both PS to-go
containers and plastic bags. Below is a summary of progress to-date, a final summary will be
provided during a June Study Session (see next step #2).
Legal
Staff has consulted with the City Attorney, Tom Scott, about the City’s general authority to
regulate carryout packaging. The City Attorney has researched the topic and will be at the
Special Study Session to answer questions. The summary of his initial analysis is as follows:
I. The City Council has the legal authority to adopt an ordinance regulating
carryout packaging.
The city’s authority to adopt ordinances on a particular topic is derived from the city
charter and state statute. While there is no specific charter provision or state statute
that authorizes regulation of packaging, both the city charter and state statute
empowers a city to adopt ordinances relating to the promotion of the general welfare
of the city and its citizens. City Charter Section 1.02; Minn. Stat. § 412.221, Subd.
32. Additionally, the city charter empowers the city to regulate persons, corporations
and associations engaged in any occupation, trade or business.
II. There are no state or federal laws which preempt the city from legislating in
this area.
There are types of conduct a city cannot regulate because the state or federal
government has preempted local regulation either by adopting comprehensive
regulation and/or expressly prohibiting local regulation. We have not identified any
federal or state law or regulation that would preempt or prohibit the city’s regulation
of carryout packaging.
• Ongoing
Research
May
• Industry Experts
Panel
• Confirm Direction
June
• Public Information
Process
• Public Comment
July - August
• Recommend
Policy
September
Special Study Session Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: Polystyrene / Plastic Bag Update
III. The city will need to develop a record showing that any ordinance that is
adopted is rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose of the City
of St. Louis Park.
While a city council has broad discretion in determining what regulations promote the
general welfare of the community, there must be evidence showing that the regulation
addresses a legitimate concern of the city and its citizens, and that the regulation
rationally addresses that concern in some manner. The regulation does not need to
comprehensively address all aspects of a particular topic. While the benefit of the
regulation can be debatable, there must be some rational basis supporting it.
While this is typically a fairly easy standard for a city to meet, when a city adopts an
ordinance under its general welfare authority, as opposed to more specific statutory
authority, dealing with a topic that cities have not historically regulated, it should be
expected that a court will look at the ordinance more closely if challenged.
Policy Development
PS to-go containers: Staff is tracking the City of Minneapolis’ Green To-Go packaging
ordinance, as Council has indicated a preference for this model. Minneapolis’ ordinance does
not allow food for immediate consumption to be packaged in any material that is not
reusable, recyclable, or compostable. Following this model would affect restaurants using
polystyrene to-go packaging, as well as plastic-lined paper cups, plates, and food boats.
Single-use plastic bags: Several options for limiting the use of plastic bags are being
researched, including:
I. Passing a resolution to urge or encourage decreasing the consumption of plastic
bags.
II. Adopt ordinance requiring a fee be charged for a customer choosing to use a
plastic bag
III. Adopt ordinance disallowing the use of all plastic bags.
IV. Combination approach – disallow plastic bags and charge a fee for paper bags.
Staff identified and surveyed eight cities similar in size to St. Louis Park as well as one large
city: Davis, CA; Boulder, CO; Evanston, IL; Silver City, NM; Portland, OR; Corvallis, OR;
Freer, TX; and Lacey, WA. Responses have been received from four cities. Staff is working
to receive responses from two additional cities. The survey (see attachment 1) is intended to
provide information to help staff develop options, goals, and identify stakeholders and
possible opposition or barriers to successfully implementing a regulation on plastic bags.
Staff’s intent is to identify one city for the expert panel as well.
Compliance
PS to-go containers: Hennepin County Public Health is willing to work with us, if the city
chooses to regulate PS to-to containers, on identifying non-compliant restaurants and
communicating this to City staff. Intent is to write out a process/protocol and meet with
County inspection staff during the implementation progress. It would be City staff’s
responsibility to address enforce compliance.
Single-use plastic bags: Staff is compiling options based on survey results and sample
ordinances provided by the City Attorney.
Special Study Session Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: Polystyrene / Plastic Bag Update
2. Proposed Study Session discussion – Industry Experts Panel – June 2015
As a part of the Council’s decision making process, staff is recommending that industry
experts and stakeholder representatives be invited in to provide information during a June
study session. Depending upon the agency represented, experts will provide either
agency/organization’s position on regulating these products or information from cities that
currently regulate PS to-go containers or plastic bags.
Preliminary confirmations have been made for the following agencies to be represented:
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
• Hennepin County
• City of Minneapolis Solid Waste & Health Departments
Staff will identify and request representatives from the following:
• A city from the list of surveyed U.S. cities with bag ordinances
• MN Restaurant Association
• Twin West Chamber
• Plastic Bag/Grocers/Retailers Association
• Additional, as requested or needed
3. Study Session discussion – Check-in – June 2015
After the meeting noted above staff proposes a follow-up study session discussion in order to
confirm and understand Council’s intent to move forward with some type policy/ordinance to
regulate PS and plastic bags.
4. Public information process – July through August 2015
Staff will develop a communications plan that will inform residents and businesses that the
City is considering creating a policy/ordinance that would regulate the use of PS to-go
containers and single-use plastic bags. Outreach would:
• Explain the rationale for considering regulating the products.
• Provide stakeholders with information on what Council is considering. For example,
the different options being considered to regulate plastic bag use.
• Notify stakeholders of the opportunity to provide feedback.
Staff is planning to provide a solid waste program update to the Environment and
Sustainability Commission on June 3, 2015. This update will include the progress on
increasing recycling and organics to residential and businesses, as well as discuss PS &
Plastic Bag initiatives. Staff will work with the Commission to identify stakeholders and
additional avenues for outreach, during the public information process.
5. Study Session discussion – Update & Public Comment – August 2015
Staff will provide Council with an update on the public information process and proposes
that Council also allow public comment to be presented to them in a listening session format.
6. Study Session discussion – Policy Recommendations – September 2015
Based upon the research, expert discussion, Council and public feedback, staff will provide
Council with recommendations for polystyrene to-go containers and single-use plastic bags.
At that time, staff will also provide next steps and timeline for the recommended policy
implementation process.
QUESTIONNAIRE SENT IN ELECTRONIC FORMAT ONLY
ATTACHMENT 1
Dear :
The City of St. Louis Park, MN is considering being the first city in Minnesota to ban the use of plastic bags in
our community. St. Louis Park is a city with a population of 46,000 and is located immediately west of
Minneapolis. I know your city has implemented a similar ban and the information that you provide will be
especially helpful as we provide suggestions to our City Council.
Please provide your responses by 4/8/15. Thanks in advance for your time!
Answers may be provided in the body of the email or in an attached document. If you would prefer to call and
discuss the questions or mail your responses, please see my contact information in the signature of this email.
The questions I have for you are as follows:
1. What specific goals where you trying to accomplish by implementing the ban?
2. What groups/stakeholders did you include in your process, to both collect information from and to provide
information to?
3. What type of opposition did you encounter, including legal action, and by whom?
4. What type of ban options (i.e. what groups/business types are included/exempt, specific uses or mil
thickness exemptions, a charge for use of paper bags, a credit for use of reusable bags, etc.) did you
consider, but not include and why?
5. We would like to learn more about both your decision making process and your implementation process
and their respective timelines. If you have written processes and timelines, can you please provide these
by email? If this isn’t available, can you please provide a brief explanation processes/timelines below?
6. Was there anything that you would do differently if you were doing it again? And/or is there anything
else you would like to share about your experience?
Special Study Session Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: Polystyrene / Plastic Bag Update Page 6
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 20, 2015
1. Call to Order
President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Anne Mavity, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Commissioners absent: Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr.
Hunt), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes April 6, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
5. Reports - None
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business
7a. Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract – Central Park West,
LLC, and OP4 SLP, LLC (The Excelsior Group). Resolution No. 15-04.
7b. Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract – Central Park West,
LLC, and Regalia Suites of Minneapolis, LLC. Resolution No. 15-05.
Mr. Hunt presented the staff reports and explained that the closing on the undeveloped
14-acre property at The West End between Duke Realty and Central Park West (CPW) is
scheduled to occur in the next week at which time Duke will convey the property to CPW
and CPW will then simultaneously convey the Phase III (hotel) property to Regalia
Suites. He advised that CPW will also simultaneously convey the Phase IV and V
properties to the Excelsior Group under the name of OP4 SLP, LLC, and both parties will
execute Assignments whereby Regalia Suites assumes all the obligations related to Phase
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of April 20, 2015
III and OP4 SLP, LLC, assumes all obligations related to Phase IV and Phase V. He
stated that under the terms of the Redevelopment Contract, any time a developer wishes
to sell a portion of the redevelopment property and assign its obligations to another
unrelated entity, the EDA and City must consent, adding that the EDA’s legal counsel has
reviewed the proposed Assignments and recommends approval.
Commissioner Sanger asked if anything would change following all of the proposed
Assignments in terms of liabilities of the new entities.
Mr. Hunt replied that both entities are assuming all the respective obligations CPW had
under the Redevelopment Contract.
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-04 Approving an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment
Contract between Central Park West, LLC, and Regalia Suites of Minneapolis, LLC.
The motion passed 6-0 (Commissioner Jacobs absent).
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-05 Approving an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment
Contract between Central Park West, LLC, and OP4 SLP, LLC.
The motion passed 6-0 (Commissioner Jacobs absent).
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
President Mavity adjourned the meeting at 7:22 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Secretary President
Meeting: (FRQRPLF'HYHORSPHQW$XWKRULW\
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 5a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approval of EDA Disbursements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing EDA Disbursement Claims for the
period of March 28, 2015 through April 24, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA desire to approve EDA disbursements in
accordance with Article V – Administration of Finances, of the EDA Bylaws?
SUMMARY: The Accounting Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the EDA to
review and approve. The attached reports show both EDA disbursements paid by physical check
and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information
follows the EDA’s Bylaws and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: EDA Disbursements
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:05:22R55CKS2LOGIS400
1Page -Council Check Summary
- 4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
33.00CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
33.00
15,000.00DMD PROPERTIES LLC MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE LAND HELD FOR RESALE
15,000.00
798.33EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
888.96WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
888.96ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
525.00ELLIPSE II G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
273.33HSTI G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
798.33VICTORIA PONDS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
798.33PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
888.96CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
888.96MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,105.88PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
888.96EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
798.33ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
210.00WOODDALE POINTE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
888.96WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
888.96AQUILA COMMONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
888.92HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,008.33HARD COAT G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
13,427.50
5,000.00FRANZEN LAW & POLICY GROUP LLC HRA LEVY G&A LEGAL SERVICES
5,000.00
2,151.32HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER DEVELOPMENT - EDA BALANCE SHEE DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
3,159.59DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A RENT REVENUE
5,310.91
698.61INFOGROUPDEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A POSTAGE
698.61
3,110.55KENNEDY & GRAVEN MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE LEGAL SERVICES
396.00WEST END TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES
145.00MILL CITY G&A LEGAL SERVICES
360.00PARK COMMONS G&A LEGAL SERVICES
4,011.55
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page 2
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:05:22R55CKS2 LOGIS400
2Page -Council Check Summary
- 4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
69.50LHB ENGINEERS & ARCHITECTS ELLIPSE II G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
69.50
3,000.00LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
3,000.00
5,000.00MCCDDEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5,000.00
42.32OFFICE DEPOT DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
42.32
51,574.73ST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS BUREAU CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-CVB
51,574.73
1,250.00UNIVERSAL CLEANING SERVICES INC MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,250.00
135.92XCEL ENERGY 4601 HWY 7 PROP ACQUISITION HEATING GAS
135.92
Report Totals 104,554.04
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page 3
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 7a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West, LLC, and
RISLP, LLC (TPI Hospitality)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Assignment and
Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Central Park West, LLC and RISLP, LLC.
This action requires a similar approval by the City Council and is listed on the May 4th Consent
Calendar.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA find that the Assignment and Assumption of the
Redevelopment Contract between Central Park West, LLC and RISLP LLC (TPI Hospitality) is
in the best interest of the City and its residents?
SUMMARY: In December 2014, the EDA and City Council approved the Second Amendment
to Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment between the EDA, the City, Duke
Realty LP, and Central Park West, LLC (“CPW”). At that time, the parties agreed that CPW
would acquire the undeveloped 14 acres of The West End redevelopment property (the
“Property”), and that up to six additional phases of construction would replace the phases agreed
to in the original Contract. Central Park West Phases I and II are to consist of multifamily
housing, Phase III will be a hotel, and Phases IV and V will be Class A office buildings.
On April 20th the EDA and City Council approved an Assignment and Assumption of
Redevelopment Contract for the Phase III hotel property between Central Park West, LLC and
Regalia Suites of Minneapolis. Late last week CPW informed Staff that rather than transferring
the hotel property to Regalia Suites of Minneapolis it intends to convey the property to RISLP,
LLC an affiliate of TPI Hospitality which is the owner of the Hilton Homewood Suites at The
West End and 30 other hotel properties in Minnesota and Florida. Staff is supportive of the
property transfer to this qualified and experienced hotel developer. Therefore, a new Assignment
is needed between Central Park West, LLC and RISLP LLC. The EDA’s legal counsel has
reviewed the proposed Assignment and Assumption and recommends the EDA and City Council
approve and consent to these documents.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Under the proposed Assignment and
Assumption Agreement, RISLP , LLC (TPI Hospitality) assumes all the financial obligations that
were to be incurred by Central Park West, LLC under the Redevelopment Contract as it pertains
to the Phase III (hotel) property.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director, and City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN
CENTRAL PARK WEST, LLC AND RISLP, LLC
BE IT RESOLVED By the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority ("Authority") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Authority is currently administering its Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Project")
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 ("HRA Act"), and within the Project
has established The West End Tax Increment Financing District (“TIF District”).
1.02. The Authority, the City of St. Louis Park (“City”) and Duke Realty Limited
Partnership (the “Redeveloper”) entered into an Amended and Restated Contract for Private
Redevelopment Dated as of May 17, 2010, as amended (the “Contract”), regarding redevelopment
of a portion of the property within the TIF District, which has been assigned in part to Central Park
West, LLC (“CPW”).
1.03. CPW previously proposed to convey a portion of the property that is the subject of
the Contract (the “Subject Property”) to Regalia Suites of Minneapolis, LLC and received the
Authority’s consent to such conveyance, but has now determined that it is in the best interest of the
Project and TIF District to convey the Subject Property to RISLP, LLC (the “Assignee”). The
Assignee intends to construct the hotel phase of development on the Subject Property defined in the
Contract as Central Park West Phase III. In connection with such conveyance, CPW seeks to assign
certain obligations of CPW related to the Subject Property to the Assignee, and the Assignee agrees
to accept such obligations, all pursuant to an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment
Contract between CPW and Assignee (the “Assignment”).
1.04. The Board has reviewed the Assignment and finds that the approval and execution of
the Authority’s consent thereto are in the best interest of the City and its residents.
Section 2. Authority Approval; Other Proceedings.
2.01. The Assignment, including the attached Consent of the Authority related thereto, as
presented to the Board is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter
the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President and Executive Director,
provided that execution of the consent to the Assignment by such officials shall be conclusive
evidence of approval.
2.02. The President and Executive Director are hereby authorized to execute on behalf of
the Authority the Consent attached to the Assignment and any other documents requiring execution
by the Authority in order to carry out the transaction described in the Assignment.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
2.03. The Authority’s prior consent to the Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment
Contract between CPW and Regalia Suites of Minneapolis, LLC is hereby revoked.
2.04. Authority staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to carry
out the intent of this resolution.
Reviewed for Administration:
Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority May 4, 2015
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
THIS ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(this “Agreement”) dated as of the ___ day of __________________, 2015, is made and entered
into by and between Central Park West, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company
(“Assignor”), and RISLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (“Assignee”).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Assignor desires to assign to Assignee certain of Assignor’s obligations
under that certain Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment dated May 17,
2010, recorded August 20, 2010, as Document No. 4781478 (the “Contract”), and that certain
First Amendment to Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment dated
November 21, 2011, recorded December 28, 2011, as Document No. 4913709 (the “First
Amendment”) and that certain Second Amendment to Amended Restated Contract for Private
Redevelopment dated December 15, 2014, recorded ___________________, 2015, as Document
No. ______________ (the “Second Amendment” and together with the Contract, the First
Amendment and the Second Amendment, the “Redevelopment Contract”) by and among
Assignor, Duke Realty Limited Partnership, the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal
corporation (“City”), and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the
“Authority”); and
WHEREAS, Assignor is contemporaneously herewith conveying certain real property,
legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Subject Property”), to Assignee pursuant to
that certain Purchase Agreement dated April 24, 2015, as amended and/or assigned (the
“Purchase Agreement”), by and between Assignor and Assignee; and
WHEREAS, title to the Subject Property (and other property owned by Assignor) is
subject to and encumbered by the Redevelopment Contract, and the Subject Property consists of
a portion of the real property defined as the Redevelopment Property under the Redevelopment
Contract and the real property defined as the Golden Valley Property under the Redevelopment
Contract; and
WHEREAS, Assignor desires to assign certain of its obligations, rights and interest in, to
and under the Redevelopment Contract to Assignee as of the date on which title to the Subject
Property is vested in Assignee (the “Transfer Date”), and Assignee desires to accept the
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
assignment thereof and assume certain of Assignor’s obligations under the Redevelopment
Contract from and after the Transfer Date, all as more particularly hereinafter set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the covenants and
agreements contained herein, Assignor and Assignee hereby covenant and agree as follows:
1. Any capitalized term used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the
meaning ascribed to such term in the Redevelopment Contract.
2. As of the Transfer Date, Assignor hereby assigns to Assignee the Assumed
Obligations (as defined in Section 4 below), and all of Assignor’s rights and interest in, to and
under the Redevelopment Contract relating or pertaining to, and to the extent applicable to, the
Subject Property.
3. Assignor hereby agrees to indemnify and defend Assignee, its successors and
assigns, and its and their employees, agents, members, managers and officers (collectively the
“Assignee Indemnified Parties”) against, and hold the Assignee Indemnified Parties harmless
from, any and all cost, liability, loss, damage or expense, including, without limitation,
reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses (collectively, “Losses and Liabilities”), arising out of or
in any way related to a failure by Assignor, its successors or assigns to keep and perform, or a
default by Assignor, its successors or assigns under, any of the covenants, obligations and
agreements to be kept and performed by the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract
with regard to the Subject Property prior to or after the Transfer Date, except for the Assumed
Obligations (as hereinafter defined).
4. Assignee, as of the Transfer Date, hereby accepts the foregoing assignment, and,
except as hereinafter expressly provided, assumes and agrees to keep and perform all of the
covenants, obligations and agreements relating to, and to the extent applicable to, the Subject
Property, and to be kept and performed by the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract
from and after the Transfer Date (collectively, the “Assumed Obligations”). More specifically,
Assignor and Assignee agree that the Assumed Obligations consist of the following (and only the
following):
(a) Section 2.2(b),(c), (d) and (f) to the extent such representations and warranties
relate to the Subject Property; further, Assignee expressly represents, for the benefit of the
Authority, that it is a limited liability company duly organized and in good standing under the laws
of the State of Minnesota, is not in violation of any provisions of its organizational documents or
(to the best of its knowledge) the laws of the State of Minnesota, is in good standing, and has
power to enter into this Agreement and has duly authorized the execution, delivery and
performance of this Agreement by proper action of its governing body;
(b) Section 3.2, only if such covenants relate to the Subject Property;
(c) Section 3.3, only if such covenants relate to the Subject Property;
(d) Sections 4.1(b) (c), and (d), clauses (1), (7), (8) and (9), only to the extent such
covenants relate to the Subject Property;
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 6
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
(e) Article IV, to the extent such covenants relate to the Subject Property
(f) Article V, to the extent such insurance covenants relate to the Subject Property;
(g) Article VI, to the extent such covenants relate to the Subject Property;
(h) Sections 7.1 and 7.2(a) to the extent such financing covenants relate to the Subject
Property;
(i) Article VIII, to the extent such covenants relate to the Subject Property; provided
that the parties agree and understand that this Assignment effectuates the Transfer of the Subject
Property as contemplated in Section 8.2(b), (c) and (d);
(j) Article IX, to the extent related to an Event of Default by Assignee in connection
with any of the Assumed Obligations; and
(k) Article X, to the extent such covenants relate to the Subject Property; and
provided that the notice address for Assignee for purposes of Section 10.5 is as provided in
Section 7 of this Agreement.
Notwithstanding the foregoing or anything else to the contrary contained herein or in the
Redevelopment Contract, Assignor and Assignee agree that Assignee is not hereby assuming or
agreeing to keep and perform any of the covenants, obligations and agreements to be kept and
performed by the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract other than the Assumed
Obligations from and after the Transfer Date.
Assignee hereby agrees to indemnify and defend Assignor, its successors and assigns,
and its and their employees, agents, partners and officers (collectively the “Assignor
Indemnified Parties”) against, and hold the Assignor Indemnified Parties harmless from, any
and all Losses and Liabilities arising out of or in any way related to a failure by Assignee, its
successors or assigns to keep and perform, or a default by Assignee, its successors or assigns
under, any of the Assumed Obligations.
5. Assignor hereby warrants and represents to Assignee as follows:
(a) The Redevelopment Contract has not been modified or amended and is full force
and effect as of the date hereof; and
(b) To Assignor's knowledge, there is no Event of Default in existence under the
Redevelopment Contract, nor is there in existence any state of facts or circumstances which, with
the giving of notice or lapse of time or both, would constitute an Event of Default under the
Redevelopment Contract.
6. Assignor will not enter into any modification or amendment of the
Redevelopment Contract that would adversely affect the rights and interest of Assignee
thereunder or the Assumed Obligations unless such modification or amendment is entered into
by Assignee. Assignor will not enter into any agreement terminating the Redevelopment
Contract without the prior written consent of Assignee. The foregoing notwithstanding, the
Assignor reserves the right to enter into any modification and amendment of the Redevelopment
Contract that would not adversely affect the rights and interest of Assignee with respect to the
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 7
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
Assumed Obligations, and further, Assignor reserves the right to partially terminate the
Redevelopment Contract, to the extent such partial termination would not adversely affect the
rights and interest of Assignee with respect to the Assumed Obligations, without Assignee’s
consent.
7. Assignor shall give and deliver a copy of any notice, demand or other
communication which Assignor gives or delivers to, or receives from, City and/or the Authority
under the Redevelopment Contract, and that relates to or may affect the rights and interest of
Assignee under the Redevelopment Contract or the Assumed Obligations, to Assignee in the
manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the Redevelopment Contract, addressed or delivered
personally to Assignee as follows:
RISLP, LLC
103 15th Avenue NW, Suite 200
Willmar, MN 56201
Attn: Thomas R. Torgerson
With copy to: Johnson, Moody, Schmidt & Kleinhuizen, P.A.
320 1st St. SW
Willmar, MN 56201
Attn: Bradley J. Schmidt
or at such other address as Assignee may, from time to time, designate by written notice to
Assignor given or delivered in the manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the Redevelopment
Contract. Assignee shall give and deliver a copy of any notice, demand or other communication
which Assignee gives or delivers to, or receives from, City and/or the Authority under the
Redevelopment Contract, and that relates to or may affect the rights and interest of Assignor
under the Redevelopment Contract, delivered personally to Assignor or given or delivered in the
manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the Redevelopment Contract to Assignor pursuant to the
notice addresses set forth therein, or at such other address as Assignor may, from time to time,
designate by written notice to Assignee.
8. This Assignment shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto
and their successors and assigns.
9. This Assignment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of Minnesota.
10. This Assignment may be executed in counterparts, which counterparts when
considered together shall constitute a single, binding, valid and enforceable agreement.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 8
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor and Assignee have executed and delivered this
Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract as of the date first above written.
ASSIGNOR:
Central Park West, LLC, a Minnesota limited
liability company
By: Central Park West Partners, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, its Sole Member
By: Providian Holdings, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company, its Managing Member
By:_________________________
Ruslan Krivoruchko, its Managing Member
STATE OF ______________)
) ss.
COUNTY OF____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_________________, 2015, by Ruslan Krivoruchko, the Managing Member of Providian
Holdings, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, the Managing Member of Central Park West
Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, the Sole Member of Central Park West,
LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 9
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
ASSIGNEE:
RISLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company
By: ____________________________
Printed: Thomas R. Torgerson
Title: _____________________
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_________________, 2015, by Thomas R. Torgerson, the __________________________ of
RISLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company.
Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED (MNI)
US Bank Plaza, Suite 470
200 South 6th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 10
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
Exhibit A
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Lot 3, Block 1, Central Park West P.U.D. No. 121.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 11
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
CONSENT, ESTOPPEL AND AGREEMENT
The undersigned, City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”), and
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic (the
“Authority”), hereby (i) consent to (A) the transfer of the Subject Property (as defined in the
foregoing Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract) (the “Assignment and
Assumption”) by the Assignor named therein (the “Assignor”) to the Assignee named therein
(the “Assignee”), and (B) the execution and delivery by the Assignor and the Assignee of the
Assignment and Assumption, and the terms and provisions thereof; (ii) agree that in the event of
any inconsistency between the terms and provisions of the Assignment and Assumption and the
terms and provisions of the Redevelopment Contract (as defined in the Assignment and
Assumption), the terms and provisions of the Assignment and Assumption shall control; (iii)
releases Assignor from all the Assumed Obligations as defined in the Assignment and
Assumption; (iv) warrant, represent and certify to the Assignee as follows:
(A) The Redevelopment Contract has not been modified or amended and is in full
force and effect as of the date hereof; and
(B) There is no Event of Default in existence, nor is there in existence any state of
facts or circumstances which, with the giving of notice or lapse of time or both, would constitute
an Event of Default under the Redevelopment Contract.
City and the Authority further covenant and agree to and for the benefit of the Assignee
as follows:
(C) City and the Authority will not enter into any modification or amendment of the
Redevelopment Contract that would affect the rights and interest of the Assignee under the
Redevelopment Contract or the Assumed Obligations (as defined in the Assignment and
Assumption) unless such modification or amendment is entered into by Assignee. City and the
Authority will not enter into any agreement terminating the Redevelopment Contract without the
prior written consent of Assignee, unless such termination does not affect the rights and interests
of the Assignee.
(D) If an Event of Default (as defined in the Redevelopment Contract) occurs, and
such Event of Default does not relate to the Assumed Obligations (as defined in the Assignment
and Assumption), City and the Authority may not and will not exercise their rights and remedies
under the Redevelopment Contract arising or existing by reason of such Event of Default with
respect to the Assignee or the Subject Property.
(E) If the City and the Authority deliver any notice, demand or other communication
to the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract that relates to or may affect the rights and
interest of the Assignee under the Redevelopment Contract or the Assumed Obligations, the City
or Authority (as the case may be) shall deliver a copy of such notice, demand or communication
to the Assignee in the manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the Redevelopment Contract, addressed
or delivered personally to the Assignee as follows:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 12
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
RISLP, LLC
103 15th Avenue NW, Suite 200
Willmar, MN 56201
Attn: Thomas R. Torgerson
With copy to: Johnson, Moody, Schmidt & Kleinhuizen, P.A.
320 1st St. SW
Willmar, MN 56201
Attn: Bradley J. Schmidt
or at such other address as the Assignee may, from time to time, designate by written notice to
City and the Authority given or delivered in the manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the
Redevelopment Contract.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 13
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and the Authority have caused this Consent, Estoppel
and Agreement to be duly executed as of this _____________ day of _________________,
2015.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By:
Its Mayor
By:
Its City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_______________, 2015, by Jeff Jacobs and Thomas Harmening, the Mayor and City Manager,
respectively, of the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the
City.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 14
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By:
Its President
By:
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
________________, 2015, by Anne Mavity and Thomas Harmening, the President and
Executive Director, respectively, of the Economic Development Authority of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, a public body corporate and politic, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Presentation: 2a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TTLE: St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors Introduction & Recap of Year
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: The 2014-2015 St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors will be in attendance to
introduce themselves to City Council. They will share information about their year as
Ambassadors and some things they have learned from representing their community.
St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors visit communities in the Twin Cities area and western
Wisconsin. Besides representing the festival, they promote the City of St. Louis Park and the
excellent schools. As an inclusive program, St. Louis Park is one of three communities (Hopkins
and Woodbury being the others) who have representation from children, young adults, and
seniors. Parktacular is the only program that has consistently had young men representing the
City, as well as racial and ethnic diversity. Many other communities admire how we are so
successful in getting a cross-section of the citizens of our city to represent our own community.
SLP Parktacular Ambassadors are public servants and promote St. Louis Park as a place where
all ages, religions, and ethnicities can live, learn, and participate in a strong community, which is
well represented by the Parktacular Festival.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Presentation: 2b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Recognition of Donation
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to announce and give thanks and appreciation for the
following donation being accepted at the meeting and listed on the Consent Agenda:
From Amount For
Celeste Hill --- A Barred Owl Mount for Westwood Hills Nature
Center Valued at $200.
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 13, 2015
The meeting convened at 6:27 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Anne Mavity, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Susan Sanger.
Staff present: Deputy City Manager/Director of Human Resources (Ms. Deno), Civic TV
Coordinator (Mr. Dunlap), Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffman), Director of Engineering (Ms.
Heiser), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Elkin), Communications Specialist (Ms.
Pribbenow), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guests: Mr. Brian Grogan (Moss & Barnett), Mr. Bruce Browning (Telecommunications
Advisory Commission), Mr. Patrick Haggerty (CenturyLink), and Mr. Terry Gips (Chair) and
members of the Environment & Sustainability Commission
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – April 20 and April 27, 2015
Ms. Deno presented the proposed special study session agenda for April 20th and the proposed
study session agenda for April 27th.
2. Competitive Video Franchising Process in St. Louis Park
Mr. Dunlap presented the staff report and introduced Mr. Patrick Haggerty from CenturyLink
and Mr. Bruce Browning from the Telecommunications Advisory Commission.
Mr. Grogan explained the Federal Cable Act stated that a franchising authority may award one or
more franchises within its jurisdiction and may not grant exclusive franchises and may not
unreasonably refuse to award an additional competitive franchise. He reviewed the state
statutory process, including notice of intent to consider an application for a franchise followed by
a public hearing and decision by Council on the issuance of an additional franchise. He stated
that CenturyLink indicated it intended to meet the same obligations as the incumbent operator
and would comply with whatever fees and taxes were imposed on the incumbent operator. He
advised that CenturyLink was not proposing to build out the entire City and had cited the “621
Order” adopted by the FCC in 2007 in which the FCC found it unreasonable for local cities to
stand in the way of competition. He noted CenturyLink felt that Order preempted state statute.
He indicated Council must consider whether Minnesota law was consistent with the 621 Order
and noted that the City of Minneapolis was currently in negotiations with CenturyLink regarding
this issue. He advised that the League had been actively involved in the matter and the City
Attorney and staff would prepare further information for Council consideration in May.
Councilmember Spano stated that Council was interested in bringing more competition into the
community, but was concerned about CenturyLink only providing services in certain areas of the
City.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 13, 2015
Mr. Dunlap explained the build-out proposed by CenturyLink was based on the technical layout
of their current system that followed their lines and strongest signals. He stated that CenturyLink
presented staff with a service map showing build-out in two neighborhoods, one in the
Westwood Hills Nature Center area and one near Meadowbrook.
Councilmember Spano said the FCC 621 order was the Bush FCC, and asked if the Obama FCC
had addressed this.
Mr. Grogan stated the FCC reviewed it in January. He reiterated that the order preempted local
restrictions and not state restrictions since many states had passed state-wide franchises in the
last five years and those were not to be challenged.
Councilmember Lindberg agreed with Councilmember Spano’s concerns and asked about a
franchisee’s ability to cherry pick where it would provide service in the future.
Mr. Grogan stated it was his impression that the issue could be negotiated with CenturyLink.
Councilmember Mavity stated she supported competition and was generally supportive of
moving forward with an additional franchise, but did not want to be the first city to approve an
additional franchise.
Councilmember Brausen stated he was supportive of offering CenturyLink the opportunity to
apply for the franchise, and of their offer to pay our legal costs if necessary.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if CenturyLink would be required to offer services to the entire
City by a certain date.
Mr. Grogan replied the City would have to negotiate that requirement with CenturyLink, adding
that staff would be watching to see what other cities did in this regard.
Councilmember Lindberg felt this represented a sound proposition for residents and was in
support of moving forward with CenturyLink’s request. He urged the City to obtain
CenturyLink’s agreement in writing to indemnify the City’s legal costs so that residents were not
at risk of unnecessary legal exposure. He would like more information on the maps and how his
west central ward would be affected, and stated he didn’t want to be the first community to do
this either.
It was the consensus of the City Council to initiate a video franchise process as requested by
CenturyLink by publishing a “Notice of Intent to Franchise.”
3. Environment & Sustainability Commission Annual Report & Work Plan
Mr. Elkin presented the staff report.
Mr. Paul Zeigle stated he was appointed to the Environment & Sustainability Commission in
January and served on the Energy Work Group and was leading the Transportation Work Group.
Ms. Rachel Harris stated she served as Vice Chair of the Commission.
Ms. Karen Laumb stated she served on the Water-Land-Wildlife Work Group.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 13, 2015
Ms. Nancy Rose stated she served on the Water-Land-Wildlife Work Group.
Ms. Judy Voigt stated she served on the Energy Work Group, the Water-Land-Wildlife Work
Group, and the Communications Work Group.
Ms. Cindy Larson O’Neil stated she served on the Energy Work Group.
Mr. Terry Gips, Chair of the Commission, thanked Council for its commitment to the
environment and commended Mr. Elkin and staff for their work with the Commission. He stated
the Commission envisioned the work groups as open-ended and reaching out to the community
and all of the Commission members wanted the Commission to have better connections to the
community and to build stronger relationships with the neighborhoods.
Ms. Larson O’Neil presented a summary of the Energy Work Group’s current partnerships and
initiatives, including PACE, Xcel Partners in Energy, and B3 Benchmarking.
Mr. Eilers stated the Energy Work Group was also working in partnership with the City on a
number of solar opportunities. He stated that a number of local and national entities had
approached municipalities and businesses about participating in solar gardens.
Ms. Voigt advised the Water-Land-Wildlife Work Group recently had Mr. John Bilotta from the
University of Minnesota Extension Office give a presentation regarding land use and clean water
and would like to have another workshop with Council and staff. She stated they would like to
promote greener infrastructure and would like to see the City’s Storm Water Pollution Protection
Plan updated based on the new PCA rules regarding runoff. She stated they would like to be
more involved and provide input to Council as it related to urban meadows, adding they felt that
areas in the City that were not developable should be urban meadows.
Councilmember Mavity stated the City had a policy that the City could not exceed 90% of the
City’s water capacity and a recent study at the West End found that capacity had gone up to
93%. She added it typically fell on the City to increase capacity. She stated she would like to
see what strategies could be implemented to address the need to continue increasing capacity.
Councilmember Spano felt it was important to consistently remind residents and businesses
about organics recycling, rain barrels, composting, etc., and to utilize residents to spread the
word about things they can be doing.
Councilmember Mavity urged the Commission to interact more with the community and have a
conversation with the community to get their input. She suggested the Commission hold a series
of listening sessions either separately or in conjunction with other events.
Ms. Voigt advised that the Communications Work Group’s goal was to raise awareness for
sustainability, encourage community involvement, and work closely with staff and the
Commission to develop a vision for sustainability.
Mr. Gips discussed the GreenStep Cities Work Group and stated they were pleased the City had
made a commitment to the program. He also discussed the Education and Action Work Group
and advised that an Organics Workshop was scheduled for Saturday, April 18th. He stated they
would like to provide education and outreach at Parktacular and National Night Out, as well as to
the neighborhood groups. He stated they were working with Health in the Park on community
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 13, 2015
gardens and would also like to do an annual community survey focused on the environment and
sustainability to obtain feedback for the work groups. He stated they would like to host a
workshop for Council and other commissions to provide basic awareness for sustainability,
develop a baseline assessment, and then develop a vision of sustainability and an action plan. He
stated they would also like to do this workshop with City staff and the broader community to
reach a shared understanding about the environment and sustainability.
Councilmember Mavity stated the City Council was already committed to this work and the
Commission’s proper audience was the community.
Councilmember Hallfin urged the Commission to reach out to the Parks and Recreation
Commission and Health in the Park and suggested holding a joint meeting with them.
Mayor Jacobs thanked the Environment and Sustainability Commission for its report and
thanked all of the members for their hard work.
4. Update on Highway 100 Traffic Issues (Verbal)
Ms. Deno distributed a copy of Mn/DOT’s response to the City’s formal request regarding traffic
signals.
Ms. Heiser advised that Mn/DOT proposed the following traffic mitigation measures: (1) to
close the southbound 100 ramp to Westside Drive; (2) to detour eastbound Highway 7 to
southbound 100 via Louisiana Avenue south to Excelsior Boulevard then east to 100; (3) to
adjust the westbound Minnetonka Boulevard detour from Wooddale Avenue to Louisiana
Avenue; and (4) to adjust the signal timing on Wooddale Avenue and West 36th Street to add
more green time for southbound Wooddale onto 36th Street and westbound 36th Street onto
northbound Wooddale. She noted the Louisiana Avenue interchange was not completed, but the
contractor had indicated they could shift the main construction times to 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m. so
that the AM and PM peaks had no closures.
Mayor Jacobs spoke in favor of approving the four traffic mitigation measures submitted by
Mn/DOT. He also urged the City to continue to push Mn/DOT to install signal lights.
Councilmember Hallfin supported the four traffic mitigation proposals and suggested that the
first proposal be implemented on a trial basis. He asked if there was any way the City could
close the ramp from Highway 7 to westbound Wooddale or to install a right turn only at this
location.
Ms. Deno replied that would require input from the Fire Chief and Police Chief to address public
safety concerns.
Councilmember Mavity asked about the cost of temporary traffic signals.
Ms. Heiser replied the cost for temporary signals was $150,000 for both signals and the cost for
permanent signals was approximately $600,000. She stated the SWLRT base plan was to have
permanent signals installed at this location in 2019.
Councilmember Mavity asked if the City could pay for installation of the signals now and
request reimbursement pursuant to the planned installation of these signals.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 13, 2015
Ms. Heiser indicated that the Southwest Project Office (SPO) was unwilling to enter into an
agreement to reimburse the City until after the SWLRT Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD is
scheduled for first quarter 2016.
Councilmember Mavity felt the City should move forward with installation of the signals and
have the reimbursement be contingent on permanent financing.
It was the consensus of the City Council to approve the second, third, and fourth traffic
mitigation measures proposed by Mn/DOT. It was also the consensus of the City Council to
approve the first traffic mitigation measure proposed by Mn/DOT pending discussion with the
Police Chief and Fire Chief to address any public safety concerns associated with this closure.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Councilmember Hallfin advised that he and Councilmember Mavity recently attended a
neighborhood meeting about the Bally’s site and there was discussion about whether the
guidelines stated that the development could be no higher than four stories. He requested
information on the original guidelines used for number of stories for Excelsior and Grand design.
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
5. Central Park West Redevelopment Contract Update
6. Encore Development – France Avenue Update
7. Bridgewater Development Update
8. Southwest LRT Update
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 20, 2015
The meeting convened at 6:49 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg
Lindberg, Anne Mavity, and Susan Sanger.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Mr. Deno), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms.
Walsh), City Clerk (Ms. Kennedy), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Assistant Zoning
Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Westwood Hills Nature Center Manager (Mr. Oestreich),
Recreation Superintendent (Mr. West), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), and
Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Use of $250,000 Westwood Hills Nature Center Donation & Master Plan
Ms. Walsh presented the staff report.
Mr. Oestreich stated that staff came up with several ideas for using the $250,000 donation,
including programming and habitat improvements, and indicated it would also be possible to use
some of the donation for the Nature Center’s master plan.
Councilmember Mavity stated that because very little was known about the donor and the gift
was fairly anonymous, she suggested doing something like an “every person pond” or “every
person monument” because that honored the donor’s intentions rather than specifically naming
something after her.
Ms. Walsh stated a water garden was something that would be observed by everybody and felt it
was something that the donor would have liked.
Councilmember Sanger agreed with the master plan idea and was in favor of using some of the
money on something that was not originally planned in the CIP. She suggested installing a sign
that acknowledged the donation to the community as a way to honor her and to plant the idea
with other people to donate money.
Councilmember Brausen spoke in favor of the water garden and agreed with Councilmember
Sanger about the need to acknowledge this donation and inspire others to similar action.
Councilmember Hallfin agreed with his colleague’s suggestions and stated he liked the idea of
having the donor’s name on something such as a bench. He added he also liked the idea of using
the donation for something not already in the CIP.
Councilmember Mavity stated that Friends of the Arts might have some creative ideas about
incorporating the donor’s name.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 20, 2015
Councilmember Sanger suggested contacting the trust attorney to ask if they had any ideas about
what might be meaningful for the donor.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano stated he liked the idea of surveying existing Nature Center users to find
out what they would like to see augmented at the Nature Center. He agreed it was important to
acknowledge the donation and suggested having a small sign that indicated a specific program or
feature was made possible by this generous gift.
Mr. Oestreich stated staff discussed creating a nature preschool and the preschool could include a
partnership with ECFE where ECFE provides a licensed teacher for the nature preschool. He
stated that the Nature Center building opened in 1981 and they had outgrown the building
beyond its intended purpose.
Councilmember Mavity stated the Environment & Sustainability Commission would have
several ideas for a new building and suggested using part of the donation for piloting new
technologies.
Ms. Walsh advised that staff would be working on a Master Plan for the WHNC and would
provide Council with a timeline and further details regarding the public participation process.
She added that the Parks and Recreation Commission would also be involved in the process.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano recessed the Special Study Session at 7:09 p.m. in order to convene the
Economic Development Authority and City Council meetings.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano reconvened the Special Study Session at 8:04 p.m.
2. Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor Licensing Discussion
Ms. Deno presented the staff report.
Mr. Walther discussed the changes to the Zoning Ordinance related to the C-2 General
Commercial zoning district and presented a map of existing liquor store locations and applicable
zoning.
Councilmember Lindberg stated his earlier position had not changed and he still felt the City was
obligated to regulate the number of liquor stores in the City. He stated he continued to feel the
concentration of liquor stores in certain areas was too high and it was worth discussing further.
He added that the City had twice the per capita rate of off sale liquor licenses than Edina and he
felt that Council should continue to have this conversation and/or make decisions about capping
the number of liquor licenses issued by the City.
Councilmember Sanger stated she continued to believe there was no problem, particularly given
the Police Department’s statement that it did not see a problem from a public safety perspective.
She stated there appeared to be enough demand for the product and she did not see a problem
with having a higher per capita ratio of liquor stores. She opined it made no sense to have
different classes of licenses depending on whether a liquor store was attached to a grocery store.
She added there may be a rationale for having a separate license for stores selling only wine or
beer, but she did not see any reason to make changes to the current licensing system with the
possible exception of limiting the total square footage allowed for a liquor store.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 20, 2015
Councilmember Mavity stated this issue was getting mixed in with a larger issue, the desire to
support and provide incentives for local small businesses to come to St. Louis Park and to stay
here and thrive. She stated there were places in the City, e.g., along Excelsior Boulevard and at
the light rail stations, where you would not want a warehouse type business and it would make
sense to limit the size of a business in these areas. She asked what tools might be available to
Council that would address some of these warehouse “big box” issues.
Mr. Hunt stated there were a number of uses the City would not allow in its TIF Districts and the
City had the ability to limit certain uses in its Redevelopment Contracts with developers.
Councilmember Hallfin was supportive of limiting the square footage of liquor stores.
Councilmember Lindberg stated residents previously expressed concerns about the Target liquor
license and its proximity to the adjacent area. He maintained that the issue was one of proximity
and tied directly into the per capita statistics.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano felt this was an issue of size rather than proximity. He stated he was less
concerned about a specific number of wine or spirits shops opening within a ten-block radius
than some big box liquor stores. He added he would rather have a larger number of small stores
than a few big box liquor stores.
Councilmember Brausen felt that the City’s current liquor stores were reasonably located and not
overly concentrated. He stated this was a legal product and there had been no demonstrable
public safety issues according to the Police Department. He felt that putting a cap on the number
of licenses would create artificial scarcity and turn liquor licenses into a valuable commodity.
He felt that the City should not step in to further regulate the issue.
Council continued its discussion regarding zoning and square footage limitations.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano and Councilmembers Hallfin, Mavity, and Sanger were supportive of
further discussion regarding a limitation on square footage.
Ms. Deno advised staff would research the imposition of square footage limitations and any
corresponding legal issues and present this information to Council at a later date.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano adjourned the meeting at 8:49 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Minutes: 3c
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 20, 2015
1. Call to Order
Mayor Pro Tem Spano called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg
Lindberg, Anne Mavity, and Susan Sanger.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Ms. Deno), City Clerk (Ms. Kennedy), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Recreation
Superintendent (Mr. West), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Retirement Recognition Resolutions for Rec Center Public Service Worker
John Monte and Engineering Technician Al Oliveira
Mayor Pro Tem Spano recited the Resolution recognizing the contributions of and
expressing appreciation to Public Service Worker John Monte. He expressed the City
Council’s thanks to Mr. Monte and wished him the best in his retirement.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano recited the Resolution recognizing the contributions of and
expressing appreciation to Engineering Technician Alan Oliveira and presented a plaque
to Mr. Oliveira. He expressed the City Council’s thanks to Mr. Oliveira and wished him
the best in his retirement.
2b. Recognition of the ACT on Alzheimer’s – St. Louis Park Task Force
Mr. John Lips introduced several members of the task force “ACT on Alzheimer’s.”
Ms. Annette Sandler provided background information regarding ACT on Alzheimer’s
and stated the mission of the project was to inspire all citizens to take action to create an
inclusive, supportive, and dementia-friendly community by increasing awareness of
Alzheimer’s. She stated that ACT on Alzheimer’s is a statewide, volunteer-driven
initiative and St. Louis Park was recruited to serve as one of the pilot communities. The
task force was instrumental in creating an analysis tool to create an action plan toward
becoming more dementia-friendly by raising awareness about Alzheimer’s. She
discussed the educational programs being developed and thanked the leadership of St.
Louis Park for supporting their work.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3c) Page 2
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 20, 2015
Ms. Amy Lieberman invited residents to attend a free lecture event on Monday, April
27th, from 6:00-7:00 p.m. at the St. Louis Park Library.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano thanked the task force members for all their work on this
important issue.
2c. Accept Monetary Donation from the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park for the
Summer Concert Series ($1,000)
Mr. Shady Taha stated that the Rotary Club sponsored the Winter Fun Day in January
and donations received at the event were provided to support the Summer Concert Series.
He presented Mr. West with a check for $1,000 from the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park.
Mr. West thanked the St. Louis Park Rotary Club for its generous donation.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting March 9, 2015
Councilmember Sanger requested that the ninth paragraph on page 3 be revised to state
“Councilmember Sanger stated that she understood the benefit of the program to Park
Nicollet but questioned the impact it had on staff time and response times should other
emergency situations arise during a home visit. She requested that the City collect and
analyze data about the effectiveness of the program in terms of whether it has reduced the
number of unnecessary 911 calls. She also questioned if the program had reduced the
number of unnecessary 911 calls.”
The minutes were approved as amended.
3b. City Council Meeting March 16, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented.
3c. Special Study Session Meeting March 16, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented.
3d. Study Session Meeting March 23, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented.
3e. Special Study Session Meeting April 6, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented.
3f. City Council Meeting April 6, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3c) Page 3
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 20, 2015
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine
and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is
desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an
appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion.
4a. Adopt Resolution No. 15-054 to recognize Public Service Worker John Monte for his
39 years of service and Resolution No. 15-055 to recognize Engineering Technician
Alan Oliveira for his 25 years of service to the City of St. Louis Park.
4b. • Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2464-15 vacating a public
sewer easement and sewer construction easements, and approve the summary
ordinance for publication.
• Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2465-15 vacating a portion of
the Utica Avenue South right-of-way, and approve the summary ordinance for
publication.
4c. Adopt Resolution No. 15-056 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from the
Rotary Club of St. Louis Park in the amount of $1,000 for the Recreation Division’s
Summer Concert Series.
4d. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Parktacular Inc. for
their Annual Parktacular Celebration Block Party to be held June 19, 2015, at the
Town Green located at Excelsior and Grand, 3815 Grand Way in St Louis Park.
4e. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Heilicher
Minneapolis Jewish Day School for an event to be held on May 12, 2015, at the Sabes
Jewish Community Center, 4330 Cedar Lake Road in St. Louis Park.
4f. Adopt Resolution No. 15-057 approving the Assignment and Assumption of
Redevelopment Contract between Central Park West, LLC and Regalia Suites of
Minneapolis, LLC.
4g. Adopt Resolution No. 15-058 approving the Assignment and Assumption of
Redevelopment Contract between Central Park West, LLC and OP4 SLP, LLC.
4h. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes of February 25, 2015.
4i. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes of March 4, 2015.
4j Approve for filing Environment & Sustainability Commission Meeting Minutes of
March 4, 2015.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindberg, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to
approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar and to waive reading of all
resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Jacobs absent).
5. Boards and Commissions - None
6. Public Hearings
6a. Thien’s, Inc., dba St. Louis Park Liquor – Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor
License
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3c) Page 4
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 20, 2015
Ms. Deno presented the staff report and explained the City received an application for an
off-sale liquor license to reflect a change in ownership at St. Louis Park Liquor. The
Police Department conducted a full background investigation on the applicant and found
three violations related to the sale of alcohol to a minor, with the most recent violation
occurring in 2013. She advised that staff met with the applicant to discuss the findings of
the background investigation and to inform the applicant that staff would recommend
denial of the application.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Pro
Tem Spano closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Brausen asked if the applicant attempted to present competent evidence
showing sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of a licensee.
Ms. Deno replied the applicant did not present any competent evidence regarding
rehabilitation and no additional information was submitted to the City.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to deny
the application from Thien’s, Inc., dba St. Louis Park Liquor, for an Off Sale Intoxicating
Liquor License located at 6316 Minnetonka Boulevard.
Councilmember Brausen stated he was uncomfortable denying an application based on a
singular liquor store conviction, adding he wished the applicant had met the requirements
of the Ordinance and attempted to provide evidence of sufficient rehabilitation. He
advised that he would abstain from voting on this matter.
The motion passed 5-0-1 (Councilmember Brausen abstain; Mayor Jacobs absent).
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to direct
the City Attorney to prepare a Resolution outlining the written findings of fact and
reasons for denying the application pursuant to Minn. Stat. 364.05 for consideration at
the May 4, 2015, City Council meeting.
The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Jacobs absent).
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items - None
9. Communications
Mr. Harmening invited residents to STEP’s annual Empty Bowls event on Thursday,
April 23rd, at Westwood Lutheran Church from 11:30 a.m.-1:30 p.m. and 4:30-6:30 p.m.
He stated that STEP is still looking for volunteers to assist at the event.
10. Adjournment
Mayor Pro Tem Spano adjourned the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Minutes: 3d
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 27, 2015
The meeting convened at 8:04 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg
Lindberg, Anne Mavity, and Susan Sanger.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Community Development (Mr.
Locke), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), and
Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guest: Mr. Paul Tucci (Oppidan, Inc.)
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – May 4 and May 11, 2015
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed special study session agenda for May 4th and the
proposed study session agenda for May 11th.
Councilmember Hallfin requested a future study session agenda discussion about the City’s
unimproved alleys and the process for getting these alleys improved.
Councilmember Sanger requested that this discussion also include unimproved streets.
Councilmember Mavity requested that Council have a study session discussion sooner rather
than later about the Environment & Sustainability Committee’s work on water and to receive an
update on the work at Bass Lake.
Councilmember Sanger requested that Council receive an update on SWLRT in light of Met
Council’s announcement today.
Councilmember Spano reported the CMC would be meeting on May 6th and agreed to report to
Council following that meeting.
Mr. Harmening advised staff would be meeting with Met Council staff this week to discuss the
impact of the increased costs on the base plan and LRCIs.
2. 4900 Excelsior Development Update (Former Bally Total Fitness Site)
Mr. Walther presented the staff report and advised that the Planning Commission recommended
approval of the Preliminary Plat but recommended denial of the subdivision variances and the
PUD. He stated that since the Planning Commission meeting, the developer had informed staff
that they intended to reduce the height of the building along Excelsior Blvd. to five stories;
reduce the number of residential units to 177; and reduce the number of affordable units to make
the project more feasible.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3d) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 27, 2015
Councilmember Sanger requested further explanation of the rationale that supports the TIF
request. She asked how much of the TIF request was attributable to the affordable units. She
also asked if the landscaping plan complied with the City’s requirements.
Mr. Hunt explained the project included extraordinary costs such as building demolition,
removal of asbestos in the building, and excavation associated with the structured parking. He
stated the amount of the TIF request that was attributable to the affordable units was not yet
known.
Mr. Walther explained the landscaping plan provided approximately 30 trees and did not meet
the City’s tree replacement and tree planting requirements. He stated that the City allowed
alternative landscaping in denser developments and there were a number of amenities provided,
including a partial green roof on the second floor. These amenities counted toward the
alternative landscaping. He added the project exceeded the Designed Outdoor Recreation Area
(DORA) requirements and was similar to the Ellipse and Central Park West projects.
Councilmember Sanger expressed concern about the number of small units and her overall
reaction was that there was too much crammed onto the site.
Mr. Tucci discussed the April 8th neighborhood meeting and stated that residents expressed
concerns about the height of the building, the parking associated with the proposed number of
units, the green space, and traffic. He advised that a traffic study was conducted and the City
Engineer found no fault in the traffic study findings. He stated they met with staff following the
Planning Commission meeting and revised the plans by removing the sixth level that included
twelve units and revised the landscaping plans to increase the number of planted areas. He stated
by removing twelve units on the sixth floor, the parking fulfilled the requirements of the City
Code and they would still have shared parking that would go to the employees of the grocery
store. The revised plan included 177 residential units with ten (10) affordable units.
Councilmember Mavity was concerned about the aesthetics and pedestrian experience around the
building in terms of green space and the amount of concrete. She stated she was not sure if the
amount of green space was sufficient. She felt that the monochromatic design seemed harsh and
needed to be softened up a bit, adding that the building on the Park Commons Drive side felt
massive to those living across the street. She stated that the proposed unit count seemed within
reach of the vision for this block.
Councilmember Hallfin stated he was struggling with the fact that the original proposal included
189 units with 20 affordable units and the current proposal reduced the number of affordable
units to ten (10), which was not in line with the City’s housing policy guideline of 10%
affordable.
Councilmember Brausen stated he was okay with a six-story building. He stated he was not
willing to approve a PUD if the project did not meet the City’s policy of 10% affordable units.
Councilmember Sanger stated the proposed building looked like a lot of other apartment
buildings in the City and did not include distinctive architecture.
Councilmember Lindberg stated if residents wanted to shop at the grocery store they would need
a place to park, and access to the site and parking was an important part of the discussion. He
requested more information about the parking.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 3d) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of April 27, 2015
Mr. Walther explained that 348 spaces were required, and the developer’s plan provided 339
spaces. The City allowed shared parking to be considered in mixed-use developments to reduce
the required number of stalls. The shared parking study found 331 stalls was the peak hour
demand for the site. He stated the peak hour demand was 106 stalls for the grocery store, and
there were 99 spaces available on the first level, including the on-street parking adjacent to the
site. He discussed the parking counts at Trader Joe’s, and stated that this site would have better
site circulation, two (2) access points into the parking lot for the grocery store, and a separate,
third access for the apartments coming off Park Commons Drive.
Mr. Tucci noted that the requirement for 348 spaces was based on 189 units and the reduced
number of residential units reduced the requirement to 337 stalls. The proposal provided 339
stalls. He also discussed the grocery store concept planned for the site and advised that the
residential units would rent for an estimated $1,200 per month up to $2,700 per month and there
would be an additional charge for a garage space.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano stated he did not have a problem with the color of the building and felt
that it provided variety to the area. He noted that the three story condos behind the building had
30-40’ mature trees along the roadway, which may help screen the view of the new building. He
agreed with the previous concerns about the number of affordable units and Council’s policy to
have 10% affordable housing.
Mr. Tucci advised that they would go back and review the plans to address Council’s concerns
and determine if they could increase the number of affordable units.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Councilmember Mavity requested clarification regarding written report #7 related to Zoning
Ordinance amendments pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines Study and
asked about the side yard setback requirements.
Mr. Walther explained that this amendment reduces the setback to 5’ for corner lots only.
Councilmember Sanger asked about any impact to the visibility triangle.
Mr. Walther advised that the Ordinance amendments would not usurp the visibility triangle.
Mayor Pro Tem Spano adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m.
Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
3. SWLRT Updates
4. Compensation and Personnel Programs
5. Health in the Park Update
6. 13th Lane and Texas Avenue MnDOT Parcels
7. Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design
Guidelines Study
8. March 2015 Monthly Financial Report
9. First Quarter Investment Report (Jan – Mar 2015)
10. 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
11. Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4D
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approval of City Disbursements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the
period of March 28, 2015 through April 24, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to approve City disbursements in
accordance with Section 6.11 – Disbursements – How Made, of the City’s Charter?
SUMMARY: The Accounting Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the City
Council to review and approve. The attached reports show both City disbursements paid by
physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information
follows the City’s Charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: City Disbursements
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
1Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
543.753MFABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
543.75
908.58A-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
908.58
262.50AARON, JOSHUA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.50
43.57ABELSON, SHARON HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
43.57
225.00ACACIA ARCHITECTS LLC MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
2,664.00ACROSS THE STREET PRODUCTIONS OPERATIONS TRAINING
2,664.00
1,000.00AD WEST END LLC ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,000.00
40,141.20ADVANCED DISPOSAL SERVICES SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE
3,259.88SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE
43,401.08
75.00AEM ELECTRIC SERVICE CORPORATION INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
75.00
325.00AEMPVEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
325.00
2,000.00AFFORDABLE DREAMS ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
2,000.00
108.63AIM ELECTRONICS ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
108.63
416.50AIRWATCH LLC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
416.50
26.00ALBRECHT, MARY POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 2
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
2Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
26.00
468.00ALL CITY ELEVATOR INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
468.00
294.00ALL SEASONS GARAGE DOOR CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
294.00
2,465.00ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
2,465.00
1,119.44AMERICAN STATE EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,119.44
1,795.80AMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,795.80
1,674.82ANCHOR PAPER CO COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
1,674.82
1,295.00ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,295.00
288.00ANDERBERG INNOVATIVE PRINT SOLUTIONS COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,245.00COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
1,533.00
838.44APACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
838.44
352.08ASET SUPPLY AND PAPER INC SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
352.08
170.63ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
170.63
3,045.07ASPEN MILLS OPERATIONS UNIFORMS
3,045.07
1,217.99ASTLEFORD INTERNATIONAL GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,217.99
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 3
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
3Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
312.32AT&T MOBILITY CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
312.32
375.00ATIR ELECTRIC CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
375.00
5,241.25ATLAS OUTFITTERS EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FIRE EQUIPMENT
5,241.25
62.08ATOMIC RECYCLING PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
62.09SEWER UTILITY G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
62.08VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
186.25
1,100.00BASSETT CREEK WATERSHED MGMT COMMISSIONSTREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,100.00
99.98BATTERIES + BULBS POLICE G & A SMALL TOOLS
63.93PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
163.91
1,560.00BEACON ATHLETICS PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,560.00
75.00BEALKE INDUSTRIES, ROBERT HOLIDAY PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
75.00
175.00BERNTSON, AMY GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
175.00
75.00BLAYLOCK PLUMBING CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
75.00
99.95BLUE TARP FINANCIAL INC REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
99.95
2,726.50BOLTON & MENK INC ENGINEERING G & A TRAINING
21,166.50STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
23,893.00
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 4
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
4Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,409.10BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,409.10
1,500.00BROOKSIDE MOBILE PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,500.00
150.00BROWNDALE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
150.00
783.83BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC ALLEY MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
783.83
510.00BUREAU OF CRIM APPREHENSION CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
510.00
276.92BURRELL TRUSTEE, GREGORY A EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
276.92
677.32BUSCH SYSTEMS INT'L INC SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS OTHER
677.32
10,861.84CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
247.50CABLE TV G & A LEGAL SERVICES
1,533.25STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL SERVICES
181.50WATER UTILITY G&A LEGAL SERVICES
49.50REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES
816.75SOLID WASTE G&A LEGAL SERVICES
13,690.34
110.91CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
110.91
391.19CBIZ FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
391.19
9,074.32CDW GOVERNMENT INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
9,074.32
1,937.50CENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,450.00CES Resid Energy Conservation OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,387.50
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 5
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
5Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
4,675.50CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS
5,151.69WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
385.42REILLY G & A HEATING GAS
152.37SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
132.55SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
1,121.70PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS
131.52WESTWOOD G & A HEATING GAS
188.16NATURALIST PROGRAMMER HEATING GAS
11,938.91
15,292.70CENTRAL PENSION FUND EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S OTHER RETIREMENT
15,292.70
261.60CENTURY LINK CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
261.60
185.88CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,076.03WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
364.46VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,626.37
351.76CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
10.48ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
229.50ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
210.00ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAINING
333.20ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
23.05ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
151.20HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING
69.94HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE
39.31HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
317.20HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE TRAINING
102.12COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
203.87COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
307.85FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
60.78POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
POLICE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
63.83POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
249.41POLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES
89.00POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
78.08POLICE G & A POSTAGE
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 6
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
6Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
100.00POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
175.00POLICE G & A TRAINING
26.00POLICE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
260.80POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
47.11POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE
26.92NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH MEETING EXPENSE
11.23JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP TRAINING
768.00E-911 PROGRAM TRAINING
10.71OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
257.33OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
302.46OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
387.58OPERATIONSUNIFORMS
1,662.71OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING
158.46OPERATIONSREPAIRS
820.63OPERATIONSTRAINING
4,832.64OPERATIONSSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
55.05OPERATIONSHEALTH & WELLNESS
1,250.00INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
25.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
370.77TRAININGTRAINING
10.00ENGINEERING G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
37.60ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
197.40TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
945.00TV PRODUCTION SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
400.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
907.30SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
470.00SEWER UTILITY G&A TRAINING
45.00SEWER UTILITY G&A LICENSES
60.59STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
47.45ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
943.35ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
186.18ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
1,500.00ADULT PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
25.00ADULT PROGRAMS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
60.00SOFTBALLTRAINING
744.44HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
17.64YOUTH PROGRAMS POSTAGE
298.23LITTLE TOT PLAYTIME GENERAL SUPPLIES
25.00WARMING HOUSES GENERAL SUPPLIES
64.80PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 7
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
7Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
306.25PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
328.50PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
28.70PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
21.75ENVIRONMENTAL G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
10.50ENVIRONMENTAL G & A TRAINING
415.76WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
47.20REC CENTER/AQUATIC PARK SAL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
376.25REC CENTER/AQUATIC PARK SAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
820.00ARENA MAINTENANCE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
36.44VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
88.43VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MOTOR FUELS
619.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A TRAINING
5.77VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MISC EXPENSE
24,528.51
360.00CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
360.00
2,875.00COATES ROOFING INC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,875.00
19,290.26COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
19,290.26
63.25COMCASTOPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
15.85OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
268.55WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
9.02BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
356.67
1,539.51COMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,539.51
14,126.15COMPASS MINERALS AMERICA SANDING/SALTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
14,126.15
191.56CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
191.56
49.70COOKE JP CO FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
49.70
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 8
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
8Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
343.00CORPORATE MECHANICAL REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,149.55AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,492.55
13,506.00COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
13,506.00
40.00CPACPOLICE G & A TRAINING
40.00
28.20CROWN MARKING INC IT G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
28.20
186.46CUB FOODS POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES
186.46
582.83CUSTOM HOSE TECH INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
582.83
368.34DALCO ENTERPRISES INC GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY
368.34
1,005.75DEGROOT, ROBERT PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,005.75
155.21DELEGARD TOOL CO GENERAL REPAIR SMALL TOOLS
155.21
424.09DELI DOUBLE WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES
424.09
612.50DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES ARENA MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
612.50
5,620.35DEPT EMPLOYMENT & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTEMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A UNEMPLOYMENT
5,620.35
3,974.92DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
3,974.92
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 9
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
9Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
293.25DEX MEDIA EAST LLC ENTERPRISE G & A ADVERTISING
293.25
1,251.00DEZURIK INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,251.00
349.53DISCOUNT STEEL INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
349.53
418.35DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
418.35
1,809.02DJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC AQUATIC PARK BUDGET BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
263.78AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,072.80
3,047.87DO-GOOD.BIZ INC COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE
603.82NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH POSTAGE
3,651.69
225.00DON'S RODENTS WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
225.00
87.50DUBE, JIM INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
87.50
1,000.00DYBEVIK, SARAH & RYAN ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
2,500.00ESCROWSDEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
3,500.00
604.77ECM PUBLISHERS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES
245.74STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL NOTICES
83.78PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A LEGAL NOTICES
934.29
1,375.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ESCROWS
1,375.00
253.00EISOLD, JASON REC CENTER BUILDING MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
253.00
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 10
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
10Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
8,310.64ELECTRIC PUMP INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
8,310.64
950.00ELEMENT MATERIALS TECHNOLOGY GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
950.00
954.78EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
954.78
50.00ENCORE BROKERS IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
50.00
508.85ENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT & SERVICES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
508.85
56.26ERICKSON, BREANNA NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH MEETING EXPENSE
56.26
19,475.00ET&T DISTRIBUTORS INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
815.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
20,290.00
15.97FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
346.28GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
362.25
136.29FASTENAL COMPANY POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
77.68PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
10.32GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
224.29
566.34FERGUSON WATERWORKS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
566.34
327.47FERRELLGASICE RESURFACER MOTOR FUELS
327.47
240.00FIRE SAFETY USA INC OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS
240.00
181.62FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 11
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
11Page -Council Check Summary
- 4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
181.62
4,434.45FRANSEN DECORATING INC GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGE
1,200.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5,634.45
32.99FRATTALLONE'S HARDWARE PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
32.99
2,371.84GARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,371.84
4,402.56GEAR WASH LLC OPERATIONS
4,402.56
3,973.14GLTC PREMIUM PAYMENTS EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S LONG TERM CARE INSUR
3,973.14
146.99GOLDMAN, DEBORAH WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
146.99
1,175.00GOLIATH HYDRO-VAC INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,175.00
552.45GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
552.45
305.00GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATIONFINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
305.00
323.52GRAINGER INC, WW GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
1,115.25PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
365.40AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
190.86VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,995.03
8,144.16GRANITE LEDGE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,454.63UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
11,598.79
462.00GROUP HEALTH INC - WORKSITE EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCE
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 12
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
12Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
462.00
40.35GROVER, JEFF WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
40.35
44.98HACH CO WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
44.98
50.00HANSEN, CALEB INSPECTIONS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
50.00
458.20HARTFIEL AUTOMATION WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
458.20
8,667.06HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
8,667.06
1,017.00HCI CHEMTEC INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,017.00
3,500.00HEGMAN, DANA EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
3,500.00
262.50HENNEN, KYLE GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.50
51.00HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENT & REAL ESTATE ASSESSING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
51.00
1,925.11HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
6,667.11POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICE
449.70OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS
1,367.10OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
2,700.00PARK IMPROVEMENT G & A PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES
3,002.13WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,002.13SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,002.13STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
9,006.41PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
31,121.82
3,498.89HENRICKSEN PSG FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 13
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
13Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
3,227.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
6,725.89
29.61HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
9.51ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
35.98DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
74.30RELAMPINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
254.27WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
234.85PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
195.41PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SMALL TOOLS
215.61PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
113.95REFORESTATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
35.25ARENA MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,198.74
17,000.00HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
17,000.00
195.00HOWES, JEFFREY VOLLEYBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
195.00
600.00HRGREENTECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT
600.00
243.13HYDRA POWER HYDRAULICS PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
243.13
1,546.00I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
1,546.00
1,000.00I/O SOLUTIONS INC HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
1,000.00
19.00IATNVEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
19.00
228.96ICCINSPECTIONS G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
228.96
615.77IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
615.77SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 14
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
14Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
615.77SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
615.75STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
2,463.06
303.44INDELCOWATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
50.00IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
353.44
295.00INDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
295.00
295.10INFRASTRUCTURE TECH INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
295.10
2,250.00INNOVYZEWATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,250.00
18.15INTEGRA TELECOM IT G & A TELEPHONE
18.15
511.56INTL SECURITY PRODUCTS SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
511.56
275.00INTOXIMETERS INC POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
275.00
517.26INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
3,918.73GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
4,435.99
75.00IPMA-HR MINNESOTA HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING
75.00
371.75I-STATE TRUCK CENTER GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
371.75
31.29J & F REDDY RENTS PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
31.29
2,246.91JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
2,246.91
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 15
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
15Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
35.00JENSEN, TRENT GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
35.00
12.39JERRY'S HARDWARE ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
7.17ROUTINE MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
3.24DAMAGE REPAIR SMALL TOOLS
13.74DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
264.56WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
52.14PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
18.19PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
25.88PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
5.63GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
402.94
356.79JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,008.00PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,364.79
323.94JOHN HENRY FOSTER MN WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
323.94
2,750.99KEEPRS INC POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
2,750.99
503.08KELLER, JASMINE Z EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
503.08
149.00KIDCREATE STUDIO PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
149.00
1,000.00KILIC, NURETTIN ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,000.00
332.50KILLMER ELECTRIC CO INC INSTALLATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
332.50
594.00KOERING, STEVE EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
594.00
5,500.00KORN FERRY LEADERSHIP CONSULTING CORP HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 16
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
16Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
5,500.00
1,630.67KREMER SERVICES LLC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,630.67
140.00KUBE, CLARK INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
140.00
73.67LAKE FOREST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
73.67
110.00LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
110.00
62.01LANO EQUIPMENT INC UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
62.01
631.09LARSON, JH CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
631.09
2,613.05LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
2,613.05
315.48LAW ENFORCEMENT TARGETS INC RANGE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
315.48
71.53LAWSON PRODUCTS INC GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
71.53
18,480.26LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
18,480.26
1,000.00LIDTKE, BRAD ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,000.00
997.69LIFE SUPPORT INNOVATIONS OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
997.69
3,496.29LINAEMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY
3,496.29
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 17
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
17Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
159.90LIND ELECTRONICS INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
159.90
6,739.73LOCKGUARD INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
92.75REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
6,832.48
5,858.45LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES
5,858.45
2,964.25LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,964.25
33,095.00LOGISIT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
20,304.90TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
53,399.90
2,487.50LOTUS PRINT GROUP OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
2,487.50
16.99MACQUEEN EQUIP CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
16.99
1,325.00MADISON, DANIEL BROOMBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,325.00
267.20MALONE, DANIEL ATHLETIC CAMPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
267.20
18,155.31MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
18,155.31
84.81MARTENS, AFTON JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP TRAINING
84.81
12,350.63MAVO SYSTEMS MUNICIPAL BLDG OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
12,350.63
45.00MEADOWBROOK COLLABORATIVE JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP TRAINING
45.00
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 18
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
18Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,000.00MEIER, DWAYNE ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,000.00
80.00MEMAOPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
80.00
507.00MENARDSWATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
333.47PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
251.60PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
129.94WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,222.01
91.43MERKLEY, SCOTT PUBLIC WORKS G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
91.43
932.06METHODIST HOSPITAL SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
932.06
1,072.00METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS VOLLEYBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,072.00
24,601.50METROPOLITAN COUNCIL INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
307,654.25SEWER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES
332,255.75
278.95MICRO CENTER PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
74.99PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
49.98WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
69.99VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
473.91
122.00MIDDLE ENGLISH INTERPRETING NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
122.00
82.00MIDWEST ELECTRIC & GENERATOR INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
82.00
465.30MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
465.30
139.00MINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITS
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 19
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
19Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
139.00
795.00MINNESOTA BUREAU CRIMINAL APPREHENSION POLICE G & A TRAINING
795.00
147.66MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
147.66
50.00MINNESOTA DEPT HEALTH REILLY BUDGET LICENSES
50.00
16.00MINNESOTA NCPERS LIFE INS EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITS
16.00
120.00MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY SEWER UTILITY G&A TRAINING
120.00
100.00MINNESOTA STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSOC. OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
100.00
168.00MINUTEMAN PRESS PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIES
168.00MEETINGSOFFICE SUPPLIES
336.00
200.00MN DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY FACILITIES MCTE G & A LICENSES
200.00
2,500.00MOBIUS INC HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,500.00
35.00MORLEY, PAUL YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUE
35.00
25.00MPCAGENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
312.50PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT SOIL TESTING SERVICES
337.50
5,734.90M-R SIGN CO INC FABRICATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
5,734.90
1,350.00MRA-THE MANAGEMENT ASSOC HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 20
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
20Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
1,350.00
10.00MRPAORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
10.00
30.42MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
30.42
909.91MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
909.91
262.50MUHLBAUER, RYAN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.50
180.00MUNICI-PALS POLICE G & A TRAINING
60.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
240.00
587.60MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
587.60
275.00MVTL LABORATORIES REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
275.00
1,071.19NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
24.84ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
211.73WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
525.25PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
171.04VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
374.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SMALL TOOLS
9.99PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
349.04GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,737.08
1,172.67NATURAL REFLECTIONS VII LLC SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,259.67SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
779.66SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
370.00SSD #4 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
646.00SSD #5 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,228.00
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 21
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
21Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
16,195.00NITTI ROLLOFF SERVICES SPEC ASSMT CONSTRUCTION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
16,195.00
100.00NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
100.00REC CENTER/AQUATIC PARK SAL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
200.00
15,328.13NORTHEAST TREE INC TREE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
15,328.13
500.00OAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
500.00
57.42OFFICE DEPOT ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
332.30FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
42.32GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES
156.93POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
42.17POLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES
249.99POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
55.46OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES
800.68INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
96.72PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
3.53WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
124.78ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
58.92WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
3.53VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,024.75
608.50OFFICE TEAM PUBLIC WORKS G & A SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES
608.50
159.51OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
162.40WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
321.91
49.18ON SITE SANITATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
157.87PORTABLE TOILETS/FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
234.96OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
122.46WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
564.47
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 22
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
22Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
172.74OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
172.74
31.54PAUL, NATHAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
31.54
8,400.00PCCS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
8,400.00
125.00PERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,540.00COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
1,665.00
320.00PERRA, SUSAN PARK PAVILIONS RENT REVENUE
320.00
1,500.00PETERSON, BLAINE ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,500.00
10.00PETTY CASH COMM & MARKETING G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
20.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
12.50TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
3.22WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
16.60WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
10.00WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
8.66SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
19.28SEWER UTILITY G&A MEETING EXPENSE
14.70SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
9.00SOLID WASTE G&A MEETING EXPENSE
47.06PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
19.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LICENSES
10.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
57.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES
257.02
61.29PETTY CASH - WWNC WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
9.78WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
13.33HOME SCHOOL GENERAL SUPPLIES
84.40
11,666.67PLACEGENERAL FUND G&A GRANTS - STATE
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 23
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
23Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
11,666.67
2,950.60POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
2,950.60
257.64POPP.COM INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONE
257.64
1,440.00POST BOARD POLICE G & A LICENSES
1,440.00
1,176.00POTTERS INDUSTRIES INC PAINTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,176.00
490.00PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
490.00
196.76PRECISE MRM LLC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TELEPHONE
196.76WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
196.76SEWER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
196.76STORM WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
787.04
1,149.00PRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
1,149.00
98.98PREMIUM WATERS INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
98.98
152.00PRINTERS SERVICE INC ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
152.00
150.00PRO AUTO DETAILING PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
150.00
60,010.00PROJECT FOR PRIDE IN LIVING LA CT REPAIR & REPL RESV B S GENERAL
60,010.00
146.00PUMP & METER SERVICE BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
146.00
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 24
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
24Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
15,129.40Q3 CONTRACTING WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
15,129.40
128.50QUEST ENGINEERING INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
128.50
94.53QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGE
94.53
125.00RAINY DAZZ ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
125.00
2,682.58RANDY'S SANITATION INC FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
1,416.88REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
4,099.46
5,500.75REACH FOR RESOURCES INC COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,500.75
76.10REGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS LLC POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
76.10
495.00REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
495.00
1,889.00REINDERS INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,889.00
4,078.19RICOH USA INC IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
4,078.19
107.44RIGID HITCH INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
107.44
119.49ROBBINSDALE, CITY OF HOCKEY PROGRAM REVENUE
119.49
250.00ROSELL, ROB GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
250.00
90.00ROTARY CLUB OF SLP POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 25
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
25Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
213.00POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
303.00
31,534.52RSP ARCHITECTS LTD PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
31,534.52
1,396.50RTVISION INC ENGINEERING G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
1,396.50
234.12S&K PALLET JACK REPAIR & SALES LLC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
234.12
3,500.00SABES JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,500.00
10,595.00SAFEASSURE CONSULTANTS INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10,595.00
60.54SAM'S CLUB OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
271.85HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
13.54WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES
345.93
165.00SAVAGE CRIME PREVENTION ASSN POLICE G & A TRAINING
165.00
601.16SCAN AIR FILTER INC REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
601.16
258.10SCHAAKE COMPANY, AJ HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
258.10
1,120.00SCHNEIDER FOUNDATION, BARBARA POLICE G & A TRAINING
1,120.00
1,947.60SCREEN VISION AQUATIC PARK BUDGET ADVERTISING
1,947.60
5,010.08SEHSTREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5,010.08
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 26
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
26Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
89.43SHERWIN WILLIAMS PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
89.43
11.30SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO GRAFFITI CONTROL OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
11.30
62.01SHRED-IT USA MINNEAPOLIS ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10.00FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
53.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
10.60INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10.60WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10.60PARK AND REC G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
156.81
164.00SIGN PRODUCERS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
164.00
1,524.90SLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
1,524.90
6,137.86SNYDER ELECTRIC PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6,137.86
600.00SPECIAL SERVICES GROUP LLC POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
600.00
192.82SPRINTIT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONS
192.82
123.13SPS COMPANIES INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
123.13
1,924.39SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,924.39
45.00ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY EDUCATION YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUE
45.00
3,000.00ST LOUIS PARK POLICE EXPLORERS EXPLORERS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
3,000.00
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 27
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
27Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
139.00ST PAUL, CITY OF POLICE G & A TRAINING
825.99PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
964.99
346.20STOCKTON, WILL HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE TRAVEL/MEETINGS
346.20
19.95-STREICHER'S POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
11.90-POLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES
136.11ERUOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
104.26
93.49STRINGER, BETSY HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE MEETING EXPENSE
93.49
300.00SUMMIT SUPPLY CORP OF COLORADO PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
300.00
282.00SWANSON FLO-SYSTEMS CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
282.00
555.00TABLES AND TENTS RENTAL COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
555.00
757.00TAHO SPORTSWEAR SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
757.00
12.46TARGET BANK POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES
52.50NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH TRAVEL/MEETINGS
81.99WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
146.95
55.47TELELANGUAGE INC ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
55.47
101.00TERMINIX INT REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
101.00
36.45THOMPSON, LINDSEY HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLE
36.45
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 28
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
28Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
138.92THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
138.92
814.79THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
814.79
716.50TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
716.50
3,388.44TKDAWATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
3,388.44
129.84TOWMASTERGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
129.84
4,600.00TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
4,600.00
10,800.00TRAFFIC DATA INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10,800.00
75.00TREE CARE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION ENVIRONMENTAL G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
75.00
484.51TRI STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
167.95TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
652.46
762.54TRUCK VAULT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
762.54
33.12TURFWERKSGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
33.12
300.00TWIN CITIES SIGN INSTALLATIONS SSD 1 G&A OTHER
250.00SSD 2 G&A OTHER
200.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER
150.00SSD #4 G&A OTHER
1,000.00SSD #6 G&A OTHER
1,900.00
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 29
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2LOGIS400
29Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
532.00TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
532.00
627.54TWIN CITY OUTDOOR SERVICES INC SNOW PLOWING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,756.25SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
982.50SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,366.29
720.00UHL CO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
351.50COP SHOP REPAIRS
390.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT
1,461.50
661.97UNIFORMS UNLIMITED (PD)SUPERVISORY OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,207.99PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
135.00COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
3,004.96
316.00UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAY
316.00
146.78UNIVERSAL SPECIALTIES WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
146.78
1,580.00UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
1,580.00
311.75US ARCHITECTURAL LIGHTING SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
311.75
214.00US HEALTH WORKS MEDICAL GROUP HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
214.00
734.73USA BLUE BOOK WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER
734.73
306.93USA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC OPERATIONS TELEPHONE
306.93
453.95VAIL, LORI HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
453.95
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 30
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
30Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
8,267.58VALLEY-RICH CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
8,267.58
266.80VAUGHAN, JIM ENVIRONMENTAL G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
266.80
50.04VERIZON WIRELESS SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE
10,653.86CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
74.62CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
10,778.52
31.60VESSCO INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
31.60
305.80VIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,047.20WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
305.80WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,658.80
4,950.00WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS ESCROWS GENERAL
4,950.00
250.99WALSER CHRYSLER JEEP GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
250.99
273.00WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
273.00
500.00WELCH, JENNIFER HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
500.00
213.90WEST, JASON ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
213.90
3,240.00WESTWOOD SPORTS SOFTBALL GENERAL SUPPLIES
3,240.00
20,506.76WHEELER LUMBER LLC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
20,506.76
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 31
4/27/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:38R55CKS2 LOGIS400
31Page -Council Check Summary
-4/24/20153/28/2015
Amount
Vendor ObjectBU Description
170.00WRAP CITY GRAPHICS CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,220.00PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
60.00WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,450.00
333.00WSB ASSOC INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
333.00
14,015.45XCEL ENERGY GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE ELECTRIC SERVICE
22.77OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
24,336.53PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
23,892.82WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
1,811.70REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE
3,664.73SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
504.19STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
3,342.08PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
26.93BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE
48.83WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE
431.83WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
13,484.46REC CENTER BUILDING ELECTRIC SERVICE
85,582.32
40.00YAHOO ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
40.00
62.23-ZIEGLER INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
2,658.10PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,595.87
68.76ZORO TOOLS INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
68.76
Report Totals 1,341,972.70
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 32
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard
Design Guidelines.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines
consistent with Council expectations?
SUMMARY: City staff worked with a consultant and a City Council appointed Task Force on
the attached Design Guidelines for the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard in 2014. The study
area lies between Quentin Ave. S. and France Ave. S.
The process included several Task Force meetings, two neighborhood-wide meetings, and a joint
study session with Planning Commission and City Council. City Council was supportive of the
Design Guidelines, and suggested only a modest change to the buffer distance between
commercial parking and adjacent residential lots. Based on input from the November joint study
session, the changes were incorporated into the document and shared with the Task Force in
December. In 2015, staff worked with the consultant to add more site demonstrations to the
document, so people can better visualize how the design guidelines may be applied to the entire
study area.
The Guidelines address six key areas: Boulevard experience; Public realm; Neighborhood
interface; Site design; Building design; and Traffic, access and parking. The Task Force
developed the Guidelines to encourage a pattern of development for new buildings and reuse of
existing sites.
Staff would like to sincerely thank all the Task Force members whom are listed in the document,
and the many participants in the community meetings, for all of their time and thoughtful
consideration in developing and evaluating these Design Guidelines.
NEXT STEPS: Staff will share the Design Guidelines with prospective developers and property
owners to encourage development that aligns with the community’s goals. Also, staff prepared
zoning ordinance amendments recommended in the Design Guidelines that would codify some
of the study recommendations. The ordinance is on this agenda for City Council consideration.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost for the consultant engaged in the
study was funded by the Development Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Design Guidelines for South Side of Excelsior Boulevard
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
April 29, 2015
for the South Side of
Excelsior Boulevard
Design Guidelines
LHB, Inc. SRF Consulting Group, Inc
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 2
2 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Client
St. Louis Park
City Staff
Tom Harmening, City Manager
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Julie Grove, Planning/Economic Development Assistant
Consultant Team
LHB, Inc.
SRF Consulting Group, Inc.
PERFORMANCE
DRIVEN DESIGN.
Design Guidelines for the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard
Task Force Members
Robb Bader
Caitlin Goff
Bob Cunningham
Maureen Fitzgerald
Alison Moehnke
June Petrie
Larry North
Michael Edlavitch
Sam Bryson
Graham Merry
Matt Stangl
Aimee Olson
Thia Bryan
Ben Stewart
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 3
Table of Contents3
Table of Contents
Introduction
Context
Context and Conditions
Corridor Zones
Commercial and Residential Zoning
Process and Schedule
Planning Process
Goals, Themes and Directions
Design Guidelines Overview
Boulevard Experience
Public Realm
Neighborhood Interface
Site Design
Building Design
Traffic, Access and Parking
Boulevard Experience
Guidelines
4-5
6
6-7
8-9
10-11
12
12-15
16
18
18
18
18
19
19
19
20
20-21
Public Realm
Guidelines
Neighborhood Interface
Guidelines
Site Design
Guidelines
Building Design
Guidelines
Traffic, Access and Parking
Guidelines
Considerations for Code Revisions
Demonstrations
3900-4900 Blocks
22
22-23
24
24-25
26
26-29
30
30-33
34
34-37
38
40
40
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 4
Introduction
4 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Introduction
Creating a set of guidelines to shape the future of the
south side of Excelsior Boulevard is a forward-looking
action intended to enhance the ways the study area fits
an important community corridor. The process is not
reactive; during the planning process there were no
imminent proposals for change. But just as important,
the interests of neighbors are served as they contemplate
a longer term view of primarily commercially-zoned
parcels that immediately abut a residential area.
The guidelines address a series of parcels that exist in a
narrow band along the south side of Excelsior Boulevard
between Quentin Avenue and France Avenue. Guidance
is offered to shape:
• the public realm, ensuring the qualities of an
extensive streetscape that defines Excelsior Boulevard
are recognized as new investment occurs;
• site design, directing key components of the
configuration of a site to maintain focus on goals
related to a walkable public realm;
• building design, affirming the ways in which the most
dominant element of a parcel establishes consistency
in quality, orientation, and experience;
• neighborhood interface, establishing clear directions
for the ways in which development within the study
area is defined relative to residential neighbors to the
south; and
• traffic, access, and parking, suggesting patterns of
movement for vehicles that are efficient and safe and
encouraging integration of elements that support the
use of the site with its overall design character.
These guidelines are intended as a tool to creatively
shape development. They aim at intentions first, and
then support the stated intentions with a series of
design directions. Proponents of new development or
investment might find ways to satisfy the intentions of
Figure1.1 Existing image of Excelsior Boulevard at Natchez Ave/Grand Way.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 5
5 Introductionthe guidelines in ways that do not perfectly align with
their more specific guidance. In this way, the guidelines
are not prescriptive, but provide a way of offering
guidance to developers and property owners, neighbors,
and the city—all parties who have an interest in creating
enduring patterns of development in the study areas
oriented to goals established or reinforced during the
planning process.
The guidelines do not replace the city’s zoning regulations.
For someone seeking to create something they feel is a
better fit to a difficult parcel—or even one where there
are few development constraints—the guidelines aid in
defining directions that align with broader goals for the
corridor. They provide a way of establishing consistency
in investment beyond zoning.
The guidelines are not a mandate, and developers may
choose to invest following patterns that align exactly
with a parcel’s zoning. But the process used to create
the guidelines suggest a more inviting long-term view
of parcels within the study area, should the intentions
of these guidelines be addressed as change happens on
sites. They demonstrate a preference arrived at through
a dialog with interested stakeholders—property owners
and neighbors, and they suggest a way of extending that
dialog with those who choose to make change along the
south side of Excelsior Boulevard.
Figure1.2 Possible future building design along Excelsior Boulevard.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 6
6 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Context and Conditions
Miracle Mile Zone near Park Nicollet Blvd.Excelsior and Grand Zone, at Natchez Ave Small scale development, set close to the street Ellipse Zone, NE of Huntington Ave
Figure1.3 Images of Excelsior Boulevard
Context and Conditions
Context
The study area exists largely as a narrow band of
properties along Excelsior Boulevard’s south side
between Quentin Avenue and France Avenue. In many
cases, the parcels are less than 150 feet deep and not
more than 54 feet wide, and in some cases, the parcels
are oddly shaped, making redevelopment difficult.
Development character varies among the parcels,
sometimes with buildings advancing near the sidewalk
along Excelsior Boulevard and at other times buildings
receding to the rear of a site with parking being
prominent and near the street.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 7
Context and Conditions7
Study Boundary
Figure1.4 Study area
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 8
Context and Conditions
8 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Figure1.5 Corridor context zones
Corridor Context
To understand the study area, one needs to consider
the entirety of the Excelsior Boulevard corridor. An early
dialog with the Task Force emphasized the study area
as one piece of the corridor’s fabric, with patterns that
stand apart from other stretches of the corridor. Broadly,
development along the corridor might be characterized
in five zones (see Figures 1.7 and 1.8).
The varying characters of development along Excelsior
Boulevard extend through decades of its evolution.
Perpetuating that character seems an appropriate
guide and a way of maintaining the sense of a varied
experience along Excelsior Boulevard, and recognizes the
way people in St. Louis Park have viewed the corridor for
just about as long. In framing guidelines, the underlying
character might be viewed as one of the baselines
influencing future character of development. In this way,
the scale and pattern of development in the study area
might evolve, but not in ways that might appear foreign
to Excelsior Boulevard.
Regulatory Context
Properties in the study area fall into three zoning
classifications. While the details of specific zoning
should rely on the city’s zoning ordinance, the general
requirements for each of the three zoning classifications
can be summarized in Figure 1.11.
For commercial properties in St. Louis Park, the city uses
a method of determining parking requirements based
on use. This is especially important on parcels within
the study area, where sites are small but the buildings
might accommodate a range of uses, each driving a
different demand for parking. This “registration of land
use” method assures that parking supporting an activity
on a parcel is determined by the use, not the zoning
classification. In doing this, a restaurant with a high
parking demand could not occur on a site where the
necessary parking could not be accommodated.
Land use was not a consideration in the study of the
south side of Excelsior Boulevard. The guidelines, from
the perspective of land use context, do not recommend
changes in land use or zoning. As a result, the patterns
of primarily commerical use along the boulevard
is perpetuated, as is the position of a few blocks of
residential use. It should be noted that the Task Force has
indicated it would not object to a reconsideration of the
residential land use, particularly related to diversity of
residential development in these few blocks.
Zone General Location General Character
Park Nicollet North side of corridor, TH 100 to Quentin
Ave
Large scale development,
set back from sidewalk
South side of corridor, Woodale Ave to
Quentin Ave
Large scale development,
set back from sidewalk
Large scale development,
set back from sidewalk
Small scale development, set near
sidewalk or set back from sidewalk
Moderate and small scale
development, set near sidewalk
Moderate scale development, set near
sidewalk or set back from sidewalk
North side of corridor, Quentin Ave to
Monterey Drive
South side of corridor, Quentin Ave to
France Ave
North side of corridor, Kipling Ave to
Hungtington Ave
North side of corridor, Hungtington Ave to
France Ave
Miracle Mile
Excelsior and Grand
Study Area
Neighborhood Commercial
Ellipse
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 9
9 Corridor CharacterFigure1.6 Excelsior Boulevard corridor context zones
Development
Park Nicollet Zone
Excelsior and
Grand Zone
Neighborhood
Commercial
Ellipse Zone
Large scale, set
back from sidewalk
Large and small
scale, set close to
the street
Moderate and
small scale, set
close to the street
Moderate and small
scale, set close to
the street (north
side)
Small scale, set
close to the
street (south
side)
Miracle Mile
Zone Character
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 10
Context and Conditions
10 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Figure1.7 Zoning table
Current Zoning, Generally C-1 C-2 R-3Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Two-family Residence
Purpose and Effect The purpose of this C-1 neighborhood
commercial district is to provide for low-
intensity, service-oriented commercial uses
for surrounding residential neighborhoods.
Limits will be placed on the type, size, and
intensity of commercial uses in this district
to ensure and protect compatibility with
adjacent residential areas.
3 stories or 35 ft
1.2
5 ft
15 ft abutting street, 0 ft or
match adjacent residential
20 ft
10 ft abutting alley
0 ft if under 35 ft and not adjacent
residential; 15 ft if adjacent
residential 1/2 building height
if height is 35 ft or greater
15 ft abutting street, 0 ft or
match residential if adjacent (plus
additional if taller than 35 ft)
15 ft abutting street, 7 ft and 5 ft
(single family) 9ft and 6ft (duplex)
na na 11 units per acre
5 ft 25 ft
25 ft
2.0 0.25
3 stories or 35 ft6 stories or 75 ft (certain conditions
allow for greater height)
The purposes of the C-2 general
commercial district are to:
(1) Allow the concentration of general
commercial development for convenience
of the public and mutually beneficial
relationship to each other in those areas
located away from residential areas
designated by the comprehensive plan;
(2) Provide space for community facilities
and institutions that appropriately may
be located in commercial areas;
(3) Provide adequate space to meet
the needs of modem commercial
development, including off-street
parking and truck loading areas;
(4) Minimize traffic congestion; and
(5) Carefully regulate the intensity of
commercial development as it refers to
both internal site factors and external
impacts.
The purpose of the R-3 two-family
residence district is to provide
appropriately located areas for one-family
and two-family dwelling units on parcels of
reasonable size; ensure adequate light, air,
privacy and open space for each dwelling
unit; provide institutional and community
services such as parks, schools, religious
facilities, and community centers
supportive of a residential area while
safeguarding its residential character;
protect residential properties from noise,
illumination, unsightliness, odors, dust,
dirt, smoke, vibration, heat, glare, high
traffic volumes and other objectionable
influences.
Height
Floor Area Ratio
Density
Yard, front
Yard, side
Yard, rear
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 11
11Current ZoningFigure1.8 Current residential and commercial zoning
Commercial
Corridor Focal
Intersections
Excelsior Blvd.
Streetscape
Neighborhood
Residential
Interface with
Neighborhood
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 12
Process and Schedule
12 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Planning Process
The process of defining guidelines for the South Side of
Excelsior Boulevard focused on two primary methods of
receiving input from the community: two neighborhood
meetings, the first of which occurred at the outset of the
planning process; and Task Force meetings that occurred
throughout the planning process.
Neighborhood Meetings
The first of two neighborhood meetings occurred at
the beginning of the planning process. At the meeting,
attendees worked in small groups to respond to a series
of questions and then shared the highlights of their work
with the larger assembled group. Input was varied, as
summarized on the following pages, but key concerns
and ideas focused on creating walkable and safe
experiences. At the meeting, the following goals floated
to the surface as being important to the development of
the south side of Excelsior Boulevard:
• Protecting neighborhood interests
• Drawing other cities to replicate our non-conforming
vision
• Creating human-scaled buildings that invite walkability
• Establishing a unified fence between commercial and
residential properties
• Recognizing that over a 20-year time horizon, anything
is possible
In one of the exercises, meeting participants were asked
to assess their sense of the potential for change for parcels
within the study area. While the groups recognized many
of the parameters involved in making change happen,
most suggested that nearly all the parcels in the study
area would eventually change. The notion of eventual
change became important in meetings with the Task
Force and in framing guidelines for parcels in the study
area.
A second neighborhood meeting occurred later in the
planning process and included a review of the process
and the directions that evolved through interactions
with the Task Force. General reaction to the proposed
guidelines was positive, with questions being addressed
to details of the guidelines and methods of eliminating
Figure1.9 Images from the first neighborhood meeting, March 19 2014.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 13
13Process and Schedulebillboards (which was not addressed during this
process, but is addressed by other sections of the city
ordinances).
During Neighborhood Meeting Two, participants raised
questions or offered comments related to:
• Allowed building heights: the guidelines reinforce
the underlying zoning, but allow some flexibility in
height if it can be demonstrated that a better design
can be achieved. For instance, a first floor height
greater than 12 or 14 feet may be desirable, but may
be limited for projects targeting three stories. The city
may determine, in this case, that a better design can be
achieved by allowing additional height (on the order
of a few feet, most likely). Additional height may also
be desired to better screen mechanical equipment
located on rooftops. It should be noted, however, that
the limited site area of most parcels would not likely
allow buildings approaching the maximum zoning
height.
• Billboards: billboards were not addressed by the
guidelines, but are controlled by other parts of the
city’s zoning ordinance.
• Parking: the underlying issue is one of quantity and
management. The city uses a registration of land
use methodology to control parking tied to the
activity within a building. To date, that method has
demonstrated good success in managing parking on
sites.
• Traffic : new development or investment might
increase traffic, but the incremental change would
have to be compared to a fully functional and occupied
(and zoning-compliant) use within the study area. It is
unlikely that significant additional square footage of
development could be achieved without major parcel
assembly, and even then the likely change in traffic
generation would be limited.
• Development: given the design guidelines,
participants were interested to know if developers
could do anything they want. In fact, a proposal for
development must adhere to existing zoning or
pursue a path to development using a planned unit
development approach, in which case the city and
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 14
Process and Schedule
14 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
the developer would use these guidelines to direct
development appropriately.
• Pedestrian crossings: the design guidelines do not
change the character or function of the roadway or any
crossings of Excelsior Boulevard. The goal, however, is
to increase the pedestrian orientation of development
along the south side of the boulevard, so further study
may be required to ensure that increased pedestrian
movements are safely accommodated considering the
volumes of traffic on Excelsior Boulevard.
• Trash and deliveries: the guidelines suggest ways
of accommodating the more utilitarian functions of
development in ways that are integrated with the
design of the site and building. The nature of these
functions might be coordinated by property owners to
avoid conflicts with the use on the site—a strategy that
would be prudent for the best use of the site. Turning
movements were tested in demonstrations to ensure
large vehicles could be reasonably accommodated.
• Development focus: participants wondered if
development in the study area would be directed to
a local population or have a more regional orientation.
In fact, both are likely necessary for the success of the
corridor, but the process did not address factors of
market orientation.
• Local character: the orientation of the guidelines
toward Excelsior Boulevard character and local
business, where possible, was appreciated. There
needs to be incentives to stay for those businesses
already located on the boulevard or to invest here for
new businesses.
• Cross easements: the goal of a nearly continuous
parking area behind buildings is facilitated by the
use of cross easements for access. The nature of an
incremental evolution is recognized, so the ultimate
configuration of access and movement (and parking)
can only be achieved with time. In the model that
places parking behind buildings, easements for utilities
may also be necessary.
Neighborhood
Meeting 1
City Council
Chambers
March 19 April 22 May 6 May 27 June 3
Municipal
Service Center
Citizens Bank
Building
Citizens Bank
Building
Citizens Bank
Building
• Project introduction directed
to need, process, outcomes
• Issues definition
• Questions
• Solicitation for participation
on task force
• Project introduction focused
on task force role
• Neighborhood Meeting One
review
• Study area assessment
• Vision discussion
• Detailed examination of
issues
• Study area needs, priorities,
qualities
• Possibilities for change
• Guideline topics definition
• Guidelines investigations
(part 1)
• Guidelines investigations
(part 2)
• Cross check of investigations
Task Force
Meeting 1
Task Force
Meeting 2
Task Force
Meeting 3A
Task Force
Meeting 3B
Engagement and Meeting Schedule
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 15
15Process and ScheduleJune 24 + July 15 September 16 November 10 December 9 TBD
Citizens Bank
Building
City Hall City Hall Citizens Bank
Building
City Hall
• Recommended guidelines
review
• Guidelines application to sites
• Presentation of findings to
date
• Solicitation of feedback
• Review of guidelines for
concurrence
• Recommendations for
adjustments
• Review of input from
Neighborhood Meeting Two
and City Council/Planning
Commission work session
Neighborhood
Meeting 2
Task Force
Meeting 4a+4b
Task Force
Meeting 5
City Council/
Planning
Commission
work session
Approval
Meetings
Task Force Meetings
Meetings of a Task Force composed of volunteer
stakeholders were organized as dialogs between
members, staff, and consultants. In each of the two-hour
meetings, the focus was on a guided discussion among
the various interests of represented by the Task Force.
Meeting Four (which focused on a discussion of draft
guidelines and actually occurred during two meetings)
resulted in an essential consensus on the character
of development in the study area, its orientation to
both Excelsior Boulevard and the neighborhood, and
accommodating necessary site functions. It’s probably
unfair to characterize consensus as unanimous
agreement because some members of the Task
Force were not present during the second session of
Meeting Four, but members present determined that
an incremental evolution of this part of the Excelsior
Boulevard corridor following the draft guidelines—with
amendments as they noted during their review—would
be appropriate.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 16
Goals, Themes and Directions
16 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Figure1.10 Images created by participants at the first neighborhood meeting.
Significant Directions
Several significant directions came out of these meetings:
• Placing buildings near the sidewalk at Excelsior
Boulevard, reinforcing the pedestrian realm and
better defining the sense of street edge
• Establishing a zone for parking generally behind
buildings with the potential for cross easements
to create continuous parking accessed from cross
streets and, in some locations, directly from Excelsior
Boulevard with parking located alongside buildings
• Creating separation from the neighborhood to limit
intrusion of light, noise, pollution, and people through
a continuous physical and landscaped barrier focused
on a ten foot wide zone at the south side of the
Excelsior Boulevard parcels
Development Pattern
Establishing guidelines for the south side of Excelsior
Boulevard is a process that involves more than offering
directions for individual parcels. In this process, several
key patterns were recognized for the study area—
patterns that apply broadly to all parcels:
• Patterns of land use are directed to underlying
zoning, with most of the corridor being commercial
in its orientation and the blocks between Inglewood
Avenue and Glenhurst Avenue being multi-family
residential;
• Reinforcement of the streetscape of Excelsior
Boulevard, particularly in ways that support an active
and more pedestrian public realm;
• Creation of highlights through enhanced site or
building development at key Excelsior Boulevard
thresholds at Quentin Avenue, Monterey Avenue, and
France Avenue;
• A definitive and continuous interface between the
parcels that comprise the study area and the single
family neighborhood to its south.
The guidelines for the south side of Excelsior Boulevard
build upon these basic patterns as a means of creating a
more integrated and holistic experience.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 17
Goals, Themes and Directions17
Heterogeneous....
A place of visible human activity...
Punctuated by unique highlights...
Integrated with the neighborhood...
Varied in form and pattern...
Connected at the public realm...
Walk-able, bike-able, and park-able...
Both “stay-at” and “go-to”...
Attractive, in all of its forms...
varied, mixed, diverse—in both
character and activity...like the
Boulevard has been and is today
where walking and biking gain equal
footing with cars on the Boulevard,
especially as connections are reinforced
with the neighborhood
through buildings or publicly-
implemented features, these highlights
mark the South Side and reinforce its
place as a part of the Boulevard
perhaps in some places more tightly
than in others, but wherever the
interface happens, it becomes a place
of value, not neglect
with some buildings pulled forward
to the Boulevard and others pushed
back—even on adjacent parcels, but
always presenting an active face on the
Boulevard and enduring
allowing the character of the
streetscape to be a significant part
of the experience, with private realm
spaces knitted to the streetscape to
support the Boulevard and its human
activity
where development doesn’t give up on
cars, but patterns aren’t dominated by
the infrastructure needed to support
them and the resulting experience is
comfortable and safe
having places focused on serving the
neighborhood and places that attract
others into the corridor, and between
introduced and indigenous activities/
uses
bringing people and business that
lend life, vitality, and activity to the
corridor, but also having the built and
natural forms result in patterns that are
endearing and enduring
Draft Guideline Creation: Themes
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 18
Design Guidelines Overview
1. BOULEVARD EXPERIENCE
2. PUBLIC REALM
3. NEIGHBORHOOD INTERFACE
18 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Therefore, the intention is for a Boulevard experience
that is mixed in activity, with appropriately scaled
and aggregated residential and commercial uses; and
that results in buildings and sites that are stylistically
harmonious, but not uniform.
Therefore, the public realm shall result in an
engaging site and building frontage—particularly
at commercial building faces or the spaces between
the sidewalk and the building face—to bring life
and energy to the street and sidewalk.
Therefore, the neighborhood interface shall be a
place of value—whether it’s a zone of integration
or separation, with both the new development and
the neighborhood benefiting from the immediate
relationship.
The south side of Excelsior Boulevard is not homogeneous
in its activity or experience, with a mix of commercial and
residential land uses and a variety of architectural styles
reflecting of both use and era of development. It’s a pattern
that has typified the Boulevard for decades, and one that
should be perpetuated as its South Side evolves.
The streetscape of Excelsior Boulevard establishes a
consistent image for the length of the corridor, particularly
considering the median. The public realm of the Boulevard
should be reinforced with uses and built forms that reinforce
the notion of visible human activity, creating a greater sense
of comfort and safety and reinforcing the notion of a walk-
able and bike-able place.
The immediate relationship between the Excelsior Boulevard
fronting properties and the neighborhood to the south
should be valued as a pattern, whether the two are integrated
of separated. The placement of buildings and the constructed
features have the potential of intruding upon neighbors, but
handled well, new development might enhance the livability
of the neighborhood.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 19
Design Guidelines Overview4. SITE DESIGN
5. BUILDING DESIGN
6. TRAFFIC, ACCESS and PARKING
19
Sites surrounding buildings vary in space, form and character
along the Boulevard, with some focused on accommodating
support functions and others offering some level of amenity,
mostly related to landscaping. In an evolution of the South
Side, the metamorphosis might more directly address how
people and human activity are accommodated as a part of
the site design.
Therefore, sites shall be developed with a strong
orientation to human scale and experience, even
in those components of the site directed to activity
supporting functions.
Buildings are the most prominent element of the corridor.
On the South Side, parcel size limits the ways buildings
can be placed, but the ways in which they are designed
can perpetuate the long-term patterns of a varied corridor.
Equally important, buildings should relate to the human
activities of the Boulevard—in scale, orientation, and detail.
Therefore, buildings shall be designed in ways that
are “read” as part of a human-scaled experience
of Excelsior Boulevard and that perpetuate their
presence on the Boulevard, accommodating a
range of uses over their lifetimes, allowing the
buildings to become ingrained in the patterns of the
Boulevard.
Therefore, the patterns of vehicle movement shall be
addressed in ways that support their presence but
limit their impact on human activity and adjacent
different uses, and that result in space on sites that
are designed for people, not merely for function.
While there may be a desire to better accommodate walking
and biking, cars will remain a fixture of the Boulevard. Their
presence and movement bridges between public and private
realms as much as any other corridor elements, so how they
leave the street and are accommodated on sites needs to be
a core piece of the design of the South Side.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 20
Design Guidelines
20 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Guidelines
The south side of Excelsior Boulevard is not homogeneous
in its activity or experience, with a mix of commercial
and residential land uses and a variety of architectural
styles reflecting of both use and era of development. It’s
a pattern that has typified the Boulevard for decades,
and one that should be perpetuated as its South Side
evolves.
Therefore, the intention is for a Boulevard
experience that is mixed in activity, with
appropriately scaled and aggregated
residential and commercial uses; and that
results in buildings and sites that are stylistically
harmonious, but not uniform.
1. BOULEVARD EXPERIENCE
Development patterns shall perpetuate the mix of uses by adhering
to current zoning and land use guidance to create a corridor that is
primarily commercial in orientation, with residential uses separating
commercial activities into nodes focused near France Avenue and
between Quentin Avenue and Inglewood Avenue. These guidelines
are intended to promote vitality in the businesses that line Excelsior
Boulevard, in buildings that form a distinct transition between the
boulevard and the neighborhood.
These guidelines shall be used to encourage consistent investment
in properties, either by reinvestment or through redevelopment, that
assures property owners, business owners and neighbors of the long-
term character of development, but not in ways that limit creativity or
force directions that cannot be economically supported.
To reinforce the experience of Excelsior Boulevard, development
shall encourage street level human activity, whether the activity is
commercial or residential in orientation. For commercial parcels,
in particular, development shall provide inviting spaces that bring
human activity near the sidewalk at Excelsior Boulevard.
While the corridor is a major vehicle corridor, the public realm and
development shall accommodate those movements that do not rely
on personal vehicles.
Figure1.11 Typical block layout showing areas affected by boulevard
experience design guidelines.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 21
Boulevard Experience21Boulevard Experience1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 1.4, 1.5
Several locations along Excelsior Boulevard define “gateways” to the
corridor and merit special attention in site and building design. In
particular, special site or building features (including, but not limited
to, public art, articulation of building elements to emphasize publicly-
oriented building elements, special landscape features or treatments,
and signage, if approved by the city) are encouraged at Excelsior
Boulevard’s intersections with Quentin Avenue, Monterey Avenue,
and France Avenue.
The City of St. Louis Park has a keen orientation to sustainability,
even to the degree that it is becoming a keystone quality of the
community. The city’s orientation to sustainability shall be reflected
in development on Excelsior Boulevard’s south side in ways that are
measurable and demonstrate significant improvements in energy and
water use and stormwater management intersections with Quentin
Avenue, Monterey Avenue, and France Avenue.
Figure1.12 Images showing elements of the boulevard experience.
1.5
1.6
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 22
Design Guidelines
22 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
The streetscape of Excelsior Boulevard establishes
a consistent image for the length of the corridor,
particularly considering the median. The public realm of
the Boulevard should be reinforced with uses and built
forms that reinforce the notion of visible human activity,
creating a greater sense of comfort and safety and
reinforcing the notion of a walk-able and bike-able place.
Therefore, the public realm shall result in
an engaging site and building frontage—
particularly at commercial building faces or the
spaces between the sidewalk and the building
face—to bring life and energy to the street and
sidewalk.
The character of streetscape elements from Excelsior Boulevard shall
be extended into publicly accessible private spaces along the corridor
(at either Excelsior Boulevard or crossing streets) to establish the sense
of a continuous public realm and a safe, inviting, walking-focused
public realm outside of the roadway.
At the point of transition to the neighborhood, there shall be a clear
demarcation of the neighborhood “entry” created within the public
realm and focused on areas of the right-of-way outside of the curbs.
Where transit facilities exist along the corridor, the design of sites shall
be organized to support transit with safe, convenient, and protected
amenities for transit users. To the extent possible, features supporting
transit shall be incorporated into the design of a site and/or building.
Sidewalks along Excelsior Boulevard shall be established at not less
than 10 feet wide, with at least six feet clear of obstructions along the
length of any property.
The presence of on-street parking shall be incorporated into the
patterns of the public realm and the overall site design by providing
safe and accessible passage for those parked in on-street spaces. In
accordance with city policies, on-street spaces along the frontage of
a property may be counted as a part of the parking supply for that
parcel.
Guidelines
Figure1.13 Typical block layout showing areas affected by public realm
guidelines.
2. PUBLIC REALM
2.1 2.4
2.5
2.2
2.3
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 23
23Public Realm2.3
2.1, 2.4, 2.5
2.4 2.5
Figure1.14 Images showing elements of the public realm.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 24
The immediate relationship between the Excelsior
Boulevard fronting properties and the neighborhood
to the south should be valued as a pattern, whether
the two are integrated of separated. The placement
of buildings and the constructed features have the
potential of intruding upon neighbors, but handled well,
new development might enhance the livability of the
neighborhood.
Therefore, the neighborhood interface shall
be a place of value—whether it’s a zone of
integration or separation, with both the new
development and the neighborhood benefiting
from the immediate relationship.
Design Guidelines
With the goal of efficiency in use of the site while protecting adjacent
properties, sites shall be organized and buildings placed to minimize
the intrusion of light, noise, activity, and other negative impacts of
commercial development into neighboring residential properties.
Because the preferred location for parking supporting a building’s
use is behind the building and nearest the residential neighborhood,
the design of the separation must address the impacts of vehicles
using the parking areas and practices to manage the parking area
when the building is not active.
To further define the boundary between commercial and residential
properties, separation shall prevent easy access to it by pedestrians.
Service functions for buildings may occur in the zone nearest the
residential neighborhoods. To limit the impacts of these activities,
regular services shall be directed to times that limit impacts on
neighbors.
24 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Guidelines
Figure1.15 Typical block layout showing area affected by neighborhood
interface design guidelines.
3. NEIGHBORHOOD INTERFACE
3.2
3.1 3.3
3.4
3.5
To establish continuity along the interface with and separation
from the residential properties to the south, a boundary zone shall
be created of not less than 8 feet in width and continuous along
the entirety of the Excelsior Boulevard parcel using materials and
treatments that are enduring and create value for properties on both
sides of the boundary. The goals of minimizing intrusions (see 3.1)
from commercial properties past the boundary area a primary goal.
Should the separation result in yard space on the residential side, that
space shall be maintained perpetually by the Excelsior Boulevard use.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 25
3.2, 3.4 3.1, 3.2, 3.4
3.1, 3.2, 3.4
3.2, 3.4
25Neighborhood InterfaceFigure1.16 Images showing possible neighborhood interface treatments.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 26
Design Guidelines
26 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Sites surrounding buildings vary in space, form and
character along the Boulevard, with some focused on
accommodating support functions and others offering
some level of amenity, mostly related to landscaping.
In an evolution of the South Side, the metamorphosis
might more directly address how people and human
activity are accommodated as a part of the site design.
Therefore, sites shall be developed with a strong
orientation to human scale and experience,
even in those components of the site directed to
activity supporting functions.
As a whole, sites shall be designed to support the notion of an
Excelsior Boulevard corridor oriented to human-scaled experiences,
to maximizing “green” space on sites and the feeling of a “green”
corridor, screening of functional site elements so that human activities
and spaces for visible human activity on sites are prominent, and to
placing buildings where they best reinforce activity and an orientation
to Excelsior Boulevard.
To facilitate coherent and efficient patterns on sites, ease of function,
consistency in addressing Excelsior Boulevard and the neighbors to
the south, and facilitate opportunities for sharing functional areas,
parking areas shall be located continuously along the rear portion of
each site or shall provide for connections between parcels along this
portion of each site. Parcels at ends of blocks must provide access at
that location. Parked cars shall be screened from views from adjacent
residential sites through the use of plantings or permanent screening.
Sites may be accessed from Excelsior Boulevard directly, provided the
access point considers a point of access shared with the adjacent parcel.
In the event the patterns of site development use an access point on
Excelsior Boulevard, the site plan shall still provide a connection to
parking located behind buildings on at least one side of the site.
To establish continuity along the public realm and to screen parking
from public view, parking areas along Excelsior Boulevard and
any crossing streets shall be screened by architectural features or
plantings. Architectural features, if used, shall be designed to reflect
the patterns and materials of the primary building on the parcel;
plantings, if used, shall be composed of combinations of evergreen
and deciduous shrubs and perennials that allow for interest in all
seasons. Plantings shall include over-story trees to provide shade
over the public sidewalk and a sense of continuity in a plane generally
aligning with the street-facing façade of the building.
Guidelines
Figure1.17 Typical block layout showing areas affected by site design
guidelines.
4. SITE DESIGN
4.4
4.34.1
4.2
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 27
27Site Design4.1 4.1 4.1 4.4
Development density for parcels shall be guided by existing city
controls, although limited site areas for unaggregated parcels will
naturally limit development based on a lack of available space for
parking, and unless methods of accommodating parking other than
surface parking are used, city controls will limit density on even
aggregated parcels.
Drive-up windows or drive-through facilities are discouraged due to
limited site area for stacking based on the smaller parcel sizes, unless
it can be clearly demonstrated that those facilities do not impede
the creation of or intrude upon pedestrian zones or create negative
impacts on nearby residential parcels.
Service areas (including trash and recycling enclosures,
loading areas, and other building support functions) that
are within the building or screened with materials that
extend from the building are preferred. Access to any
service area must occur from within the parcel and shall
be located in ways that limit the maneuvering necessary
for access by any service vehicle. Service areas separated
from buildings shall be screened by permanent materials
that substantively match the materials, patterns, and
details used in the building, with landscaping that is an
extension of the landscape patterns of the site. The service
area shall be located so that no direct views into a service
area occurs from a public street or from a walkway serving
the primary building entry.
4.5 4.7
4.6
Figure1.18 Images showing possible site design treatments.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 28
Design Guidelines
28 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Walkways between a public sidewalk and the primary building
entry shall highlight the path to the primary building entry through
architectural features, landscaping, and lighting. Walkways that are
covered or partially covered by architectural features are encouraged,
provided those features are designed consistent with the materials
and patterns of the building.
A walkway that crosses a vehicular path or parking area shall extend
the sidewalk materials through the vehicular path or parking area.
Lighting used on sites shall be consistent in color and designed to
prevent trespass of illumination onto adjacent sites. To the extent
practicable, lighting shall be integrated with the design of buildings.
Lighting sources shall not be visible.
4.11 Any landscape improvements proposed as a part of a plan
for development shall become the requirement for planted
improvements. Any plantings that die must be replaced, unless is can
be demonstrated that the growth of other plants fulfill the purpose of
the originally planned and planted materials.
4.4, 4.9 4.9 4.1, 4.8
Figure1.19 Images showing possible site design treatments.
4.10
4.9
4.8
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 29
29Site Design4.2
Figure1.20 Continuous, connected parking lots behind buildings.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 30
Design Guidelines
30 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Buildings are the most prominent element of the
corridor. On the South Side, parcel size limits the ways
buildings can be placed, but the ways in which they
are designed can perpetuate the long-term patterns of
a varied corridor. Equally important, buildings should
relate to the human activities of the Boulevard—in scale,
orientation, and detail.
Therefore, buildings shall be designed in ways that
are “read” as part of a human-scaled experience
of Excelsior Boulevard and that perpetuate their
presence on the Boulevard, accommodating a
range of uses over their lifetimes, allowing the
buildings to become ingrained in the patterns of
the Boulevard.
The mass of a building on a site shall occur on a parcel in ways that
reinforce the public realm as a mixed mode, varied, and human-
scaled corridor while protecting residential neighbors, with the
primary mass of the building pulled “forward” on a parcel.
Current zoning ordinances limit building heights, but flexibility
in overall height may be permitted if the design demonstrates the
benefits to the experience of the corridor or if the building or site
includes features benefiting the community.
The design of buildings shall address all sides of the structure in
terms of designed character, materials, fenestration, and details, with
ornament and signage that is integral to the overall building design.
Buildings shall be placed to reinforce the pedestrian orientation of
Excelsior Boulevard with most of their street-facing façade occurring
at or near the front property line.
Building materials and details shall be holistic in design (not add-
ons or used solely for the purpose of ornament) and not materials
that are representations of other materials (such as manufactured
stone or false brick). Materials shall be durable and constructed
with a sense of human craft. Termination of materials or changes in
materials across a façade shall occur in ways that are integral to the
material used; in particular, a change in materials at exterior corners is
discouraged. Details of construction and materials shall be scaled to
human experiences, particularly at street level facades along Excelsior
Boulevard.
Building taller than two stories shall have the upper floors set back
from street frontages at least 10 feet as a means of maintaining a
more human-scaled experience along Excelsior Boulevard.
5.6
5.1
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.2
Guidelines Figure1.21 Typical block layout showing areas affected by building design
guidelines.
5. BUILDING DESIGN
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 31
31Building Design5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 5.7, 5.8, 5.11, 5.12 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 5.11, 5.12
5.7
5.8
Walls oriented to streets shall be articulated with doors and windows
to encourage interaction between the public sidewalk and the interior
of commercial street level uses. No section of wall longer than 24
feet shall be void of windows or doors. A door oriented to Excelsior
Boulevard shall remain accessible during typical business hours.
Windows at street level shall be transparent and be sufficient in extent
to highlight a sense of human activity in the building at each level of
the building.
Figure1.22 Images showing possible building types and configurations.
5.9 For residential buildings, features that highlight human activity—
or the sense of human activity, such as terraces, balconies, or other
outdoor private or common spaces, shall be a part of the design of
residential buildings.
Vehicle entry doors shall not be oriented to Excelsior Boulevard.5.10
The design of the building shall highlight the building entry
through architectural elements, lighting, landscape elements, or
other features that call attention to the entry, and the building
entry shall always be oriented to and clearly visible from Excelsior
Boulevard. Other building entries may be highlighted, but shall
not take precedence over an entry oriented to Excelsior Boulevard.
A parcel with frontage on two streets may utilize a corner entry
that gives equal prominence to Excelsior Boulevard and the
intersecting street. At entries, the door itself shall be designed to
be the focal of the entry experience.
5.11
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 32
Design Guidelines
32 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Lighting used as a part of the building shall be consistent with the
color of lighting used on sites. Lighting on buildings shall be designed
to illuminate features of the building or site spaces, but not to
indiscriminately spread illumination across building facades or sites.
Signage shall be designed to be integral to the building, shall not
obscure architectural features or elements, and shall be limited to
street level facades. Signs that project over sidewalks are encouraged.
While these guidelines encourage a balance between the vehicle-
dominated environment of the roadway and the pedestrian nature
of Excelsior Boulevard’s sidewalk areas, signage is encouraged to be
scaled to the experience of the pedestrian.
5.13
5.12
5.7, 5.8, 5.12 5.7, 5.8, 5.12 5.7, 5.8, 5.11, 5.12 5.13
Figure1.23 Images showing possible building types and configurations.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 33
33Building DesignFigure1.24 Possible building configuration.
5.1, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.11, 5.12
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 34
While there may be a desire to better accommodate
walking and biking, cars will remain a fixture of the
Boulevard. Their presence and movement bridges
between public and private realms as much as any other
corridor elements, so how they leave the street and are
accommodated on sites needs to be a core piece of the
design of the South Side.
Adequate parking and convenient access is necessary to
support redevelopment or reinvestment in parcels, but
the focus on development on sites should be directed
to buildings and site spaces, not parking. Because of the
incremental nature of development and redevelopment
activities on the south side of Excelsior Boulevard,
guidance for three scenarios for parking are described:
• Redevelopment of an individual parcel
• Concurrent redevelopment of adjacent parcels
under separate ownership
• Assembly of several adjacent parcels into a larger
redevelopment site
Therefore, the patterns of vehicle movement shall
be addressed in ways that support their presence
but limit their impact on human activity and
adjacent different uses, and that result in space
on sites that are designed for people, not merely
for function.
Design Guidelines
34 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
6.1 In general, parking shall be organized to provide adequate on-site
parking to minimize the need for on-street parking and impacts on
adjacent neighborhoods. Shared parking is encouraged between
parcels on the south side of Excelsior Boulevard between Quentin
Avenue and France Avenue. Consistent with the north side, on-
street parking bays on the south side of Excelsior Boulevard may be
permitted. Additional analysis and approval by Hennepin County will
be required to determine their location, need, and justification.
6.2 Parking supply in excess of city minimum standards shall be
discouraged, however parking that addresses the potential range of
activities in a building must be considered.
Guidelines
Figure1.25 Typical block layout showing areas affected by traffic, access
and parking design guidelines.
6. TRAFFIC, ACCESS and PARKING
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 35
35Traffic, Access and Parking6.3, 6.66.1, 6.6 6.3
6.3 Surface parking areas shall be located behind buildings to the
extent practicable to encourage continuity of building frontages
along Excelsior Boulevard. If not possible, the parking area should
be located on the side of the building. Driveways and drive aisles
shall be minimized in width and provide good visibility of pedestrians
from vehicles using the driveway.
6.4 For end parcels located adjacent to a street crossing Excelsior
Boulevard, access to the parking areas should be located on the
crossing street in order to perpetuate and enhance pedestrian
activity along the Excelsior Boulevard sidewalk.
Access to and from Excelsior Boulevard should be eliminated or
consolidated wherever possible. At a minimum, Hennepin County
will allow limited access for each parcel and may limit access to no
net increase along the corridor. For access from Excelsior Boulevard,
existing median breaks for left turn movements will be allowed
at their current locations. Additional median breaks on Excelsior
Boulevard will not be allowed.
Large surface parking lots are discouraged. Where necessary to
support development, they should be broken up with landscape
areas to provide visual relief and locations for trees to significantly
shade hard surfaces, incorporate green infrastructure to the extent
practicable to assist in stormwater management, and introduce other
features that humanize the parking experience on sites.
6.6
6.5
Figure1.26 Images showing possible traffic, access and parking configurations.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 36
Design Guidelines
36 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
6.9 For the redevelopment of two adjacent parcels under separate
ownership where the redevelopment is concurrent, the following
guidelines apply:
• 6.9.1 For end parcels located adjacent to a secondary street,
access to the parking areas should be located on the secondary
street, not along Excelsior Boulevard. An internal drive aisle behind
the buildings should connect the two parcels by establishing cross
easements, allowing two-way traffic and access to surface parking.
• 6.9.2 For mid-block parcels, shared use of an internal drive aisle
to surface parking areas located behind (preferred) or alongside the
buildings should be considered by establishing cross easements
among property owners.
6.7
Figure1.27 Images showing possible traffic, access and parking configurations.
6.8 For the redevelopment of an individual parcel, the following
guidelines apply:
• 6.8.1 For end parcels located adjacent to a secondary street, access
to the parking areas should be located on the secondary street,
not along Excelsior Boulevard.
• 6.8.2 For mid-block parcels, shared use of an internal drive aisle to
surface parking areas behind (preferred) or alongside the buildings
should be considered by establishing cross easements among
property owners, if possible.
• 6.8.3 For mid-block parcels, the internal drive aisle to surface
parking areas located behind (preferred) or alongside the buildings
should be designed using a minimum side yard setback. This
would allow the opportunity for an adjacent parcel (redeveloping
at a later date) to share the internal drive aisle by establishing cross
easements among property owners.
6.7 Parking for bicycles and non-traditional vehicles should be
provided on sites in visible and accessible locations, with amenities
that encourage their use.
6.1, 6.3
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 37
37Traffic, Access and Parking6.10 For the redevelopment of assembled parcels, the following
guidelines apply:
• 6.10.1 If feasible, structured parking should be located within the
building massing, below grade or in portions of the building not
facing onto public streets.
• 6.10.2 For end parcels located adjacent to a secondary street,
access to the parking structures or surface parking should be
located on the secondary street, not along Excelsior Boulevard. An
internal drive aisle behind the buildings should traverse multiple
parcels by establishing cross easements, allowing two-way traffic
and access to surface parking.
• 6.10.3 For mid-block parcels, shared use of an internal drive aisle
to surface parking areas behind the buildings should be considered
by establishing cross easements among property owners.
6.11 The allowed development densities essentially limit any increase in
traffic resulting from redevelopment of parcels on the south side of
Excelsior Boulevard. As parcels redevelop, impacts on traffic may
require study depending on the proposed land use type, size, and
density assumptions.
6.1, 6.3, 6.8.1, 6.9.1, 6.10.2 6.10.1
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 38
Considerations for Code Revisions
38 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
As a part of the definition of guidelines, the width of
drive aisles in other communities was researched. It is
apparent from the investigation that 22 feet for drive
aisles is workable, and that given the predominately
limited parcel depth, even three feet (the difference
between the city’s current standard for drive aisle width
and the width proposed in these guidelines) may have
a considerable and positive impact on development of
the sites and aligning with the goals for the corridor.
The guidelines advocate for flexibility in overall building
height if a better building design could be achieved.
Whether additional height is necessary for first floor
height, additional parapet height to screen rooftop
mechanical units, or some other feature of the building
that affects height, the city’s current effort to consider
form-based codes might offer better guidance for
overall building height than can be achieved in these
guidelines or through the city’s current building height
standards.
Considerations for code revisions
The design guidelines are not a mandate for change,
but certain elements may merit further consideration
for modifications to zoning. While zoning ordinance
changes are a different process, those elements that
might be studied are included in the following table.
Elements Considerations
Drive aisle width
Building height
Figure1.28 Table of code revisions to be considered.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 39
39Considerations for Code RevisionsIn demonstrations performed as a verification of the
guidelines, a parking standard aligned with current
zoning was used as a key parameter. A ratio of 4.0 spaces
per 1,000 square feet is a fairly common standard for
commercial uses (not including restaurant-type uses), in
the future the ratio might seem too high, particularly for a
corridor that might be evolving to better serve uses who
are pedestrians or bicyclists. Two features of the city’s
current zoning might become important in a change:
the ability for a site’s parking supply to include adjacent
street parking and the city’s practice of registering land
use to define necessary parking.
Current zoning establishes a greater setback at sideyards
adjacent to street, but the guidelines encourage
advancing buildings on sites to create greater interaction
with public sidewalks. Maintaining the current
requirement might be at odds with other goals for the
corridor as discussed in these guidelines, and to the
extent that other considerations for building placement
near intersections (sight distance triangle requirements,
for instance), the sideyard setback for street frontages
might be modified to reduce the setback.
One of the keystone elements of the guidelines is
establishing a rear yard that allows for separation
consistently along the boundary, creating a separation
of eight feet that allows for isolation between uses, and
when coupled with the reduction in drive aisle width, has
a minimal effect on developable area of the parcel.
Elements Considerations
Parking quantity
Sideyard setback
Required rear yard
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 40
Demonstrations
75'150'300'
40 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
Demonstrations
As a means of validating the design guidelines,
demonstrations of development capacity were prepared
for several parcels, including some with relatively small
footprints. The demonstrations are not intended to be a
site plan or an actual design, and they are not intended
to serve as an economic model; no projections of value
or cost of development were considered. They function
primarily as a means of testing the potential of various
sites to accommodate development and parking in a
proper balance when the guidelines are applied.
The demonstrations used setbacks as described in the
guidelines, including the separation zone between
the parcel and the adjacent residential use, and the
configuration of parking areas behind buildings as
key elements of the “test.” Parking at a ratio of at least
4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet was also a primary
parameter.
The demonstrations suggest that new development
following the guidelines is possible on each of the
parcels within the study area, with the exception of a few
small parcels which were combined to accommodate
development. With refinements, it may be possible to
increase the amount of development on each parcel, or
to create a different configuration of building to site, or
to achieve a parking ratio closer to 4.0 spaces per 1,000
square feet. All of those are worthy design exercises
once a developer can frame a site-specific development
program and identify a targeted use. For now, the
demonstrations serve as a way of testing the capacity of
the parcels to accommodate development following the
guidelines, and there is sufficient evidence to conclude
the guidelines are practicable for redevelopment.
4900 Block
4700-4800 Block
4500-4600 Block
4400 Block
4300-3700 Block
4200 Block
3600-4100 Block
3900 Block
3500-3600 Block
Excelsior Blvd.City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 41
41Demonstrations4911
4907
4901
Figure1.29 Potential layout for the 4900 block - rear of development view Figure1.30 Potential layout for the 4900 block - Excelsior Blvd. view.
Figure1.31 Potential layout for the 4900 block.
4900 Block 4911 Excelsior
Blvd.
4907 Excelsior
Blvd.
4901 Excelsior
Blvd.
Site area 8368 sf 5850 sf 5850 sf
Proposed building footprint 2105 sf 1437 sf 1757 sf
Parking provided 8 on site
3 on street
11 total
10 on site
2 on street
12 total
5 on site
4 on street
9 total
Footprint area 2105 sf 1437 sf 1757 sf
Second floor area — 1437 sf —
Total floor area 2105 sf 2874 sf 1757 sf
FAR 0.25 0.25 0.30
Parking ratio 5.23
spaces/1000 sf
4.18
spaces/1000 sf
5.12
spaces/1000 sf
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 42
Demonstrations
42 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
4700-4800 Block 4825 Excelsior
Blvd.
4811 Excelsior
Blvd.
4801 Excelsior
Blvd.
4725 Excelsior
Blvd.
4701 Excelsior
Blvd.
Site area 11919 sf 11825 sf 12003 sf 26580 sf 20000 sf
Proposed building footprint 4025 sf 2738 sf 2738 sf 8193 sf 5128 sf
Parking provided 20 on site
3 on street
23 total
16 on site
3 on street
19 total
16 on site
3 on street
19 total
50 on site
8 on street
58 total
38 on site
5 on street
43 total
Footprint area 4025 sf 2738 sf 2738 sf 8193 sf 5128 sf
Second floor area 1464 sf 1825 sf 1817 sf 6128 sf 5128 sf
Total floor area 5489 sf 4563 sf 4555 sf 14321 sf 10256 sf
FAR 0.46 0.39 0.38 0.54 0.51
Parking ratio 4.19
spaces/1000 sf
4.16
spaces/1000 sf
4.17
spaces/1000 sf
4.05
spaces/1000 sf
4.19
spaces/1000 sf
Figure1.32 Potential layout for the 4700-4800 block - Excelsior Blvd view.Figure1.33 Potential layout for the 4700-4800 block - rear of development view.
Figure1.34 Potential layout for the 4700-4800 block.
4825
4811
4801
4725
4701
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 43
43Demonstrations4500-4600 Block 4637 Excelsior
Blvd.
4617 Excelsior
Blvd.
4615 Excelsior
Blvd.
4611 Excelsior
Blvd.
4601 Excelsior
Blvd.
4509 Excelsior
Blvd.
4501 Excelsior
Blvd.
Site area 11800 sf 11800 sf 9325 sf 12075 sf 24747 sf 19793 sf 12171 sf
Proposed building footprint 3812 sf 2705 sf 2860 sf 3446 sf 6231 sf 5483 sf 4054 sf
Parking provided 15 on site
3 on street
18 total
20 on site
3 on street
23 total
10 on site
2 on street
12 total
21 on site
3 on street
24 total
40 on site
7 on street
47 total
28 on site
5 on street
33 total
16 on site
3 on street
19 total
Footprint area 3812 sf 2705 sf 2860 sf 3446 sf 6231 sf 5483 sf 4054 sf
Second floor area — 2705 sf — 2320 sf 5377 sf 2709 sf —
Total floor area 3812 sf 5410 sf 2860 sf 5766 sf 11608 sf 8192 sf 4054 sf
FAR 0.32 0.23 0.31 0.29 0.25 0.28 0.33
Parking ratio 4.72
spaces/1000 sf
4.25
spaces/1000 sf
4.20
spaces/1000 sf
4.16
spaces/1000 sf
4.05
spaces/1000 sf
4.03
spaces/1000 sf
4.69
spaces/1000 sf
Figure1.35 Potential layout for the 4500-4600 block.
Figure1.36 Potential layout for the 4500-4600 block - Excelsior Blvd view.
Figure1.37 Potential layout for the 4500-4600 block - rear of development view.
46174637 4615 4611 4601 4509 4501
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 44
Demonstrations
44 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
4400 Block 4419 Excelsior
Blvd.
4415 Excelsior
Blvd.
4409 Excelsior
Blvd.
Site area 20163 sf 9191 sf 11066 sf
Proposed building footprint 5575 sf 2309 sf 2539 sf
Parking provided 23 on site
4 on street
27 total
8 on site
3 on street
11 total
15 on site
3 on street
18 total
Footprint area 5575 sf 2309 sf 2539 sf
Second floor area ——1671 sf
Total floor area 5575 sf 2309 sf 4210sf
FAR 0.28 0.25 0.38
Parking ratio 4.84
spaces/1000 sf
4.76
spaces/1000 sf
4.28
spaces/1000 sf
Figure1.38 Potential layout for the 4400 block - Excelsior Blvd view.Figure1.39 Potential layout for the 4400 block - rear of development view.
Figure1.40 Potential layout for the 4400 block.
4419
4415
4409
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 45
45Demonstrations4300-3700 Block 3757 Excelsior
Blvd.
4331 Excelsior
Blvd.
4321 Excelsior
Blvd.
4301 Excelsior
Blvd.
Site area 12228 sf 15872 sf 11809 sf 19551 sf
Proposed building footprint 2549 sf 3126 sf 4260 sf 4960 sf
Parking provided 18 on site
1 on street
19 total
24 on site
2 on street
26 total
17 on site
2 on street
19 total
20 on site
7 on street
27 total
Footprint area 2549 sf 3126 sf 4260 sf 4960 sf
Second floor area 1823 sf 2352 sf — 1535 sf
Total floor area 4372 sf 5478 sf 4260 sf 6495 sf
FAR 0.36 0.35 0.36 0.33
Parking ratio 4.35
spaces/1000 sf
4.75
spaces/1000 sf
4.46
spaces/1000 sf
4.16
spaces/1000 sf
Figure1.41 Potential layout for the 4300-3700 block - Excelsior Blvd view.Figure1.42 Potential layout for the 4300-3700 block - rear of development view.
Figure1.43 Potential layout for the 4300-3700 block.
3757
4331
4321
4301
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 46
Demonstrations
46 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
4200 Block 4245 Excelsior Blvd. 4201 Excelsior Blvd.
Site area 18025 sf 31747 sf
Proposed building footprint 6347 sf 7649 sf
Parking provided 24 on site
2 on street
26 total
37 on site
7 on street
44 total
Footprint area 6347 sf 7649 sf
Second floor area —3192 sf
Total floor area 6347 sf 10841 sf
FAR 0.35 0.34
Parking ratio 4.10
spaces/1000 sf
4.06
spaces/1000 sf
Figure1.44 Potential layout for the 4200 block - Excelsior Blvd view.Figure1.45 Potential layout for the 4200 block - rear of development view.
Figure1.46 Potential layout for the 4200 block.
4245
4201
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 47
47DemonstrationsFigure1.47 Potential layout for the 3600-4100 block - Excelsior Blvd view.Figure1.48 Potential layout for the 3600-4100 block - rear of development view.
Figure1.49 Potential layout for the 3600-4100 block.
3600-4100 Block 4143 Excelsior Blvd. 4131 Excelsior Blvd.4121Excelsior Blvd.4115 Excelsior Blvd.3600 Excelsior Blvd.
Site area 9832 sf 9846 sf 8790 sf 9003 sf 14523 sf
Proposed building footprint 3125 sf 3128 sf 2751 sf 2796 sf 4473 sf
Parking provided 16 on site
2.5 on street
18.5 total
16 on site
3.5 on street
19.5 total
14 on site
3 on street
17 total
16 on site
3 on street
19 total
21 on site
4 on street
25 total
Footprint area 3125 sf 3128 sf 2751 sf 2796 sf 4473 sf
Second floor area 1480 sf 1564 sf 1375 sf 1942 sf 1667 sf
Total floor area 4605 sf 4692 sf 4126 sf 4738 sf 6140 sf
FAR 0.47 0.48 0.47 0.53 0.42
Parking ratio 4.02
spaces/1000 sf
4.16
spaces/1000 sf
4.12
spaces/1000 sf
4.01
spaces/1000 sf
4.07
spaces/1000 sf
4143
4131
4121
4115
3600
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 48
Demonstrations
48 St. Louis Park Design Guidelines
3500-3600 Block 3601 Excelsior
Blvd.
4031 Excelsior
Blvd.
4015 Excelsior
Blvd.
4011 Excelsior
Blvd.
3500 Excelsior
Blvd.
Site area 14655 sf 20634 sf 8033 sf 8169 sf 8834 sf
Proposed building footprint 3965 sf 4079 sf 2427 sf 2524 sf 2951 sf
Parking provided 23 on site
3 on street
26 total
33 on site
5 on street
38 total
13 on site
3 on street
16 total
14 on site
2 on street
16 total
13 on site
2 on street
15 total
Footprint area 3965 sf 4079 sf 2427 sf 2524 sf 2951 sf
Second floor area 2350 sf 4079 sf 1358 sf 1332 sf 732 sf
Total floor area 6315 sf 8158 sf 3785 sf 3856 sf 3683 sf
FAR 0.43 0.40 0.47 0.47 0.42
Parking ratio 4.12
spaces/1000 sf
4.66
spaces/1000 sf
4.23
spaces/1000 sf
4.15
spaces/1000 sf
4.07
spaces/1000 sf
3601
4031
4015
4011
3500
Figure1.50 Potential layout for the 3500-3600 block - Excelsior Blvd view.Figure1.51 Potential layout for the 3500-3600 block - rear of development view.
Figure1.52 Potential layout for the 3500-3600 block.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 49
49Demonstrations3900 Block 3947 Excelsior Blvd. 3939 Excelsior Blvd.3929 Excelsior Blvd.*3921 Excelsior Blvd.3901 Excelsior Blvd.
Site area 26542 sf 15816 sf 567 sf 16309 sf 11261 sf
Proposed building footprint 4405 sf 5891 sf —3338 sf 2987 sf
Parking provided 37 on site
4 on street
41 total
36 on site
4 on street
40 total
—
23 on site
4 on street
27 total
10 on site
2 on street
12 total
Footprint area 4405 sf 5891 sf —3338 sf 2987 sf
Second floor area 4405 sf 3968 sf —3338 sf —
Total floor area 8810 sf 9859 sf —6676 sf 2987 sf
FAR 0.33 0.62 —0.41 0.27
Parking ratio 4.65
spaces/1000 sf
4.06
spaces/1000 sf —4.04
spaces/1000 sf
4.02
spaces/1000 sf
* City bus shelter
3947
3939
3929
3921
3901
Figure1.53 Potential layout for the 3900 block - Excelsior Blvd view.Figure1.54 Potential layout for the 3900 block - rear of development view.
Figure1.55 Potential layout for the 3900 block.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Accept the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Page 50
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West, LLC, and
RISLP, LLC (TPI Hospitality)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Assignment and
Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Central Park West, LLC and RISLP, LLC.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council find that the Assignment and
Assumption of the Redevelopment Contract between Central Park West, LLC and RISLP LLC
(TPI Hospitality) is in the best interest of the City and its residents?
SUMMARY: In December 2014, the EDA and City Council approved the Second Amendment
to Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment between the EDA, the City, Duke
Realty LP, and Central Park West, LLC (“CPW”). At that time, the parties agreed that CPW
would acquire the undeveloped 14 acres of The West End redevelopment property (the
“Property”), and that up to six additional phases of construction would replace the phases agreed
to in the original Contract. Central Park West Phases I and II are to consist of multifamily
housing, Phase III will be a hotel, and Phases IV and V will be Class A office buildings.
On April 20th the EDA and City Council approved an Assignment and Assumption of
Redevelopment Contract for the Phase III hotel property between Central Park West, LLC and
Regalia Suites of Minneapolis. Late last week CPW informed Staff that rather than transferring
the hotel property to Regalia Suites of Minneapolis it intends to convey the property to RISLP,
LLC an affiliate of TPI Hospitality which is the owner of the Hilton Homewood Suites at The
West End and 30 other hotel properties in Minnesota and Florida. Staff is supportive of the
property transfer to this qualified and experienced hotel developer. Therefore, a new Assignment
is needed between Central Park West, LLC and RISLP LLC. The EDA’s legal counsel has
reviewed the proposed Assignment and Assumption and recommends the EDA and City Council
approve and consent to these documents.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Under the proposed Assignment and
Assumption Agreement, RISLP, LLC (TPI Hospitality) assumes all the financial obligations that
were to be incurred by Central Park West, LLC under the Redevelopment Contract as it pertains
to the Phase III (hotel) property.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director, and City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN
CENTRAL PARK WEST, LLC AND RISLP, LLC
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council ("Council") of the City of St. Louis, Minnesota
("City") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“Authority”) is currently
administering its Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Project") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.001 to 469.047, and within the Project has established The West End Tax Increment Financing
District (“TIF District”).
1.02. The Authority, the City and Duke Realty Limited Partnership (the “Redeveloper”)
entered into an Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment Dated as of May 17,
2010, as amended (the “Contract”), regarding redevelopment of a portion of the property within the
TIF District, which has been assigned in part to Central Park West, LLC (“CPW”).
1.03. CPW previously proposed to convey a portion of the property that is the subject of
the Contract (the “Subject Property”) to Regalia Suites of Minneapolis, LLC and received the City’s
consent to such conveyance, but has now determined that it is in the best interest of the Project and
TIF District to convey the Subject Property to RISLP, LLC (the “Assignee”). The Assignee intends
to construct the hotel phase of development, defined in the Contract as Central Park West Phase III,
on the Subject Property. In connection with such conveyance, CPW seeks to assign certain
obligations of CPW related to the Subject Property to the Assignee, and the Assignee agrees to
accept such obligations, all pursuant to an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
between CPW and Assignee (the “Assignment”).
1.04. The Council has reviewed the Assignment and finds that the approval and execution
of the City’s consent thereto are in the best interest of the City and its residents.
Section 2. City Approval; Other Proceedings.
2.01. The Assignment, including the attached Consent thereto, as presented to the Council
is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the
transaction and that are approved by the Mayor and City Manager, provided that execution of the
Consent to the Assignment by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval.
2.02. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City,
the Consent attached to the Assignment and any other documents requiring execution by the City in
order to carry out the transaction described in the Assignment.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 3
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
2.03. The City’s prior consent to the Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment
Contract between CPW and Regalia Suites of Minneapolis, LLC is hereby revoked.
2.04. City staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to carry out
the intent of this resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 4
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
THIS ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
(this “Agreement”) dated as of the ___ day of __________________, 2015, is made and entered
into by and between Central Park West, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company
(“Assignor”), and RISLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (“Assignee”).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Assignor desires to assign to Assignee certain of Assignor’s obligations
under that certain Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment dated May 17,
2010, recorded August 20, 2010, as Document No. 4781478 (the “Contract”), and that certain
First Amendment to Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment dated
November 21, 2011, recorded December 28, 2011, as Document No. 4913709 (the “First
Amendment”) and that certain Second Amendment to Amended Restated Contract for Private
Redevelopment dated December 15, 2014, recorded ___________________, 2015, as Document
No. ______________ (the “Second Amendment” and together with the Contract, the First
Amendment and the Second Amendment, the “Redevelopment Contract”) by and among
Assignor, Duke Realty Limited Partnership, the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal
corporation (“City”), and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the
“Authority”); and
WHEREAS, Assignor is contemporaneously herewith conveying certain real property,
legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Subject Property”), to Assignee pursuant to
that certain Purchase Agreement dated April 24, 2015, as amended and/or assigned (the
“Purchase Agreement”), by and between Assignor and Assignee; and
WHEREAS, title to the Subject Property (and other property owned by Assignor) is
subject to and encumbered by the Redevelopment Contract, and the Subject Property consists of
a portion of the real property defined as the Redevelopment Property under the Redevelopment
Contract and the real property defined as the Golden Valley Property under the Redevelopment
Contract; and
WHEREAS, Assignor desires to assign certain of its obligations, rights and interest in, to
and under the Redevelopment Contract to Assignee as of the date on which title to the Subject
Property is vested in Assignee (the “Transfer Date”), and Assignee desires to accept the
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 5
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
assignment thereof and assume certain of Assignor’s obligations under the Redevelopment
Contract from and after the Transfer Date, all as more particularly hereinafter set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the covenants and
agreements contained herein, Assignor and Assignee hereby covenant and agree as follows:
1. Any capitalized term used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the
meaning ascribed to such term in the Redevelopment Contract.
2. As of the Transfer Date, Assignor hereby assigns to Assignee the Assumed
Obligations (as defined in Section 4 below), and all of Assignor’s rights and interest in, to and
under the Redevelopment Contract relating or pertaining to, and to the extent applicable to, the
Subject Property.
3. Assignor hereby agrees to indemnify and defend Assignee, its successors and
assigns, and its and their employees, agents, members, managers and officers (collectively the
“Assignee Indemnified Parties”) against, and hold the Assignee Indemnified Parties harmless
from, any and all cost, liability, loss, damage or expense, including, without limitation,
reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses (collectively, “Losses and Liabilities”), arising out of or
in any way related to a failure by Assignor, its successors or assigns to keep and perform, or a
default by Assignor, its successors or assigns under, any of the covenants, obligations and
agreements to be kept and performed by the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract
with regard to the Subject Property prior to or after the Transfer Date, except for the Assumed
Obligations (as hereinafter defined).
4. Assignee, as of the Transfer Date, hereby accepts the foregoing assignment, and,
except as hereinafter expressly provided, assumes and agrees to keep and perform all of the
covenants, obligations and agreements relating to, and to the extent applicable to, the Subject
Property, and to be kept and performed by the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract
from and after the Transfer Date (collectively, the “Assumed Obligations”). More specifically,
Assignor and Assignee agree that the Assumed Obligations consist of the following (and only the
following):
(a) Section 2.2(b),(c), (d) and (f) to the extent such representations and warranties
relate to the Subject Property; further, Assignee expressly represents, for the benefit of the
Authority, that it is a limited liability company duly organized and in good standing under the laws
of the State of Minnesota, is not in violation of any provisions of its organizational documents or
(to the best of its knowledge) the laws of the State of Minnesota, is in good standing, and has
power to enter into this Agreement and has duly authorized the execution, delivery and
performance of this Agreement by proper action of its governing body;
(b) Section 3.2, only if such covenants relate to the Subject Property;
(c) Section 3.3, only if such covenants relate to the Subject Property;
(d) Sections 4.1(b) (c), and (d), clauses (1), (7), (8) and (9), only to the extent such
covenants relate to the Subject Property;
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 6
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
(e) Article IV, to the extent such covenants relate to the Subject Property
(f) Article V, to the extent such insurance covenants relate to the Subject Property;
(g) Article VI, to the extent such covenants relate to the Subject Property;
(h) Sections 7.1 and 7.2(a) to the extent such financing covenants relate to the Subject
Property;
(i) Article VIII, to the extent such covenants relate to the Subject Property; provided
that the parties agree and understand that this Assignment effectuates the Transfer of the Subject
Property as contemplated in Section 8.2(b), (c) and (d);
(j) Article IX, to the extent related to an Event of Default by Assignee in connection
with any of the Assumed Obligations; and
(k) Article X, to the extent such covenants relate to the Subject Property; and
provided that the notice address for Assignee for purposes of Section 10.5 is as provided in
Section 7 of this Agreement.
Notwithstanding the foregoing or anything else to the contrary contained herein or in the
Redevelopment Contract, Assignor and Assignee agree that Assignee is not hereby assuming or
agreeing to keep and perform any of the covenants, obligations and agreements to be kept and
performed by the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract other than the Assumed
Obligations from and after the Transfer Date.
Assignee hereby agrees to indemnify and defend Assignor, its successors and assigns,
and its and their employees, agents, partners and officers (collectively the “Assignor
Indemnified Parties”) against, and hold the Assignor Indemnified Parties harmless from, any
and all Losses and Liabilities arising out of or in any way related to a failure by Assignee, its
successors or assigns to keep and perform, or a default by Assignee, its successors or assigns
under, any of the Assumed Obligations.
5. Assignor hereby warrants and represents to Assignee as follows:
(a) The Redevelopment Contract has not been modified or amended and is full force
and effect as of the date hereof; and
(b) To Assignor's knowledge, there is no Event of Default in existence under the
Redevelopment Contract, nor is there in existence any state of facts or circumstances which, with
the giving of notice or lapse of time or both, would constitute an Event of Default under the
Redevelopment Contract.
6. Assignor will not enter into any modification or amendment of the
Redevelopment Contract that would adversely affect the rights and interest of Assignee
thereunder or the Assumed Obligations unless such modification or amendment is entered into
by Assignee. Assignor will not enter into any agreement terminating the Redevelopment
Contract without the prior written consent of Assignee. The foregoing notwithstanding, the
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 7
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
Assignor reserves the right to enter into any modification and amendment of the Redevelopment
Contract that would not adversely affect the rights and interest of Assignee with respect to the
Assumed Obligations, and further, Assignor reserves the right to partially terminate the
Redevelopment Contract, to the extent such partial termination would not adversely affect the
rights and interest of Assignee with respect to the Assumed Obligations, without Assignee’s
consent.
7. Assignor shall give and deliver a copy of any notice, demand or other
communication which Assignor gives or delivers to, or receives from, City and/or the Authority
under the Redevelopment Contract, and that relates to or may affect the rights and interest of
Assignee under the Redevelopment Contract or the Assumed Obligations, to Assignee in the
manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the Redevelopment Contract, addressed or delivered
personally to Assignee as follows:
RISLP, LLC
103 15th Avenue NW, Suite 200
Willmar, MN 56201
Attn: Thomas R. Torgerson
With copy to: Johnson, Moody, Schmidt & Kleinhuizen, P.A.
320 1st St. SW
Willmar, MN 56201
Attn: Bradley J. Schmidt
or at such other address as Assignee may, from time to time, designate by written notice to
Assignor given or delivered in the manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the Redevelopment
Contract. Assignee shall give and deliver a copy of any notice, demand or other communication
which Assignee gives or delivers to, or receives from, City and/or the Authority under the
Redevelopment Contract, and that relates to or may affect the rights and interest of Assignor
under the Redevelopment Contract, delivered personally to Assignor or given or delivered in the
manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the Redevelopment Contract to Assignor pursuant to the
notice addresses set forth therein, or at such other address as Assignor may, from time to time,
designate by written notice to Assignee.
8. This Assignment shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto
and their successors and assigns.
9. This Assignment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of Minnesota.
10. This Assignment may be executed in counterparts, which counterparts when
considered together shall constitute a single, binding, valid and enforceable agreement.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 8
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor and Assignee have executed and delivered this
Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract as of the date first above written.
ASSIGNOR:
Central Park West, LLC, a Minnesota limited
liability company
By: Central Park West Partners, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, its Sole Member
By: Providian Holdings, LLC, a Florida limited
liability company, its Managing Member
By:_________________________
Ruslan Krivoruchko, its Managing Member
STATE OF ______________)
) ss.
COUNTY OF____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_________________, 2015, by Ruslan Krivoruchko, the Managing Member of Providian
Holdings, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, the Managing Member of Central Park West
Partners, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, the Sole Member of Central Park West,
LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company.
Notary Public
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 9
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
ASSIGNEE:
RISLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company
By: ____________________________
Printed: Thomas R. Torgerson
Title: _____________________
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF ____________)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_________________, 2015, by Thomas R. Torgerson, the __________________________ of
RISLP, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the limited liability company.
Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED (MNI)
US Bank Plaza, Suite 470
200 South 6th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 10
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
Exhibit A
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Lot 3, Block 1, Central Park West P.U.D. No. 121.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 11
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
CONSENT, ESTOPPEL AND AGREEMENT
The undersigned, City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”), and
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic (the
“Authority”), hereby (i) consent to (A) the transfer of the Subject Property (as defined in the
foregoing Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract) (the “Assignment and
Assumption”) by the Assignor named therein (the “Assignor”) to the Assignee named therein
(the “Assignee”), and (B) the execution and delivery by the Assignor and the Assignee of the
Assignment and Assumption, and the terms and provisions thereof; (ii) agree that in the event of
any inconsistency between the terms and provisions of the Assignment and Assumption and the
terms and provisions of the Redevelopment Contract (as defined in the Assignment and
Assumption), the terms and provisions of the Assignment and Assumption shall control; (iii)
releases Assignor from all the Assumed Obligations as defined in the Assignment and
Assumption; (iv) warrant, represent and certify to the Assignee as follows:
(A) The Redevelopment Contract has not been modified or amended and is in full
force and effect as of the date hereof; and
(B) There is no Event of Default in existence, nor is there in existence any state of
facts or circumstances which, with the giving of notice or lapse of time or both, would constitute
an Event of Default under the Redevelopment Contract.
City and the Authority further covenant and agree to and for the benefit of the Assignee
as follows:
(C) City and the Authority will not enter into any modification or amendment of the
Redevelopment Contract that would affect the rights and interest of the Assignee under the
Redevelopment Contract or the Assumed Obligations (as defined in the Assignment and
Assumption) unless such modification or amendment is entered into by Assignee. City and the
Authority will not enter into any agreement terminating the Redevelopment Contract without the
prior written consent of Assignee, unless such termination does not affect the rights and interests
of the Assignee.
(D) If an Event of Default (as defined in the Redevelopment Contract) occurs, and
such Event of Default does not relate to the Assumed Obligations (as defined in the Assignment
and Assumption), City and the Authority may not and will not exercise their rights and remedies
under the Redevelopment Contract arising or existing by reason of such Event of Default with
respect to the Assignee or the Subject Property.
(E) If the City and the Authority deliver any notice, demand or other communication
to the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment Contract that relates to or may affect the rights and
interest of the Assignee under the Redevelopment Contract or the Assumed Obligations, the City
or Authority (as the case may be) shall deliver a copy of such notice, demand or communication
to the Assignee in the manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the Redevelopment Contract, addressed
or delivered personally to the Assignee as follows:
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 12
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
RISLP, LLC
103 15th Avenue NW, Suite 200
Willmar, MN 56201
Attn: Thomas R. Torgerson
With copy to: Johnson, Moody, Schmidt & Kleinhuizen, P.A.
320 1st St. SW
Willmar, MN 56201
Attn: Bradley J. Schmidt
or at such other address as the Assignee may, from time to time, designate by written notice to
City and the Authority given or delivered in the manner set forth in Section 10.5 of the
Redevelopment Contract.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 13
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and the Authority have caused this Consent, Estoppel
and Agreement to be duly executed as of this _____________ day of _________________,
2015.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By:
Its Mayor
By:
Its City Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
_______________, 2015, by Jeff Jacobs and Thomas Harmening, the Mayor and City Manager,
respectively, of the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the
City.
Notary Public
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Page 14
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract - Central Park West & RISLP (TPI Hospitality)
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By:
Its President
By:
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
________________, 2015, by Anne Mavity and Thomas Harmening, the President and
Executive Director, respectively, of the Economic Development Authority of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, a public body corporate and politic, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bid Tabulation: Connect the Park! Project No. 4015-2000
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to designate Sunram Construction the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of
$859,854.00 for the 2015 Connect the Park! - Project No. 4015-2000.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The proposed improvements are consistent with the City’s
Connect the Park! sidewalk, trail and bikeway system plan.
SUMMARY: A total of three (3) bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid
results is as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Sunram Construction** $ 859,854.00
G.L. Contracting, Inc. $ 877,391.44
Blackstone Contractors, LLC $ 968,677.38
Engineer’s Estimate $ 1,090,558.40
**Sunram Construction original
bid, after review, $859,854.00 is the
accepted bid
$859,014.00
A review of the bids indicates Sunram Construction submitted the lowest bid. Sunram
Construction is a reputable contractor. Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to the firm
in the amount of $859,854.00.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
This project was planned for and included in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program
with an estimated budget of $1,209,800. Staff believes that the project is necessary and justified.
This project will be funded using General Obligation bonds for sidewalk construction.
Additional funding details are provided in the Discussion section of the report.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation: Connect the Park! Project No. 4015-2000
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Bids were received on April 21, 2015 for the 2015 Connect the Park! project.
The 2015 construction season will be the second year of implementing the City’s Connect the
Park! sidewalk and trail initiative.
This project, No. 4015-2000, will be performed in a number of locations throughout town:
• Morningside Road from the Edina City limits to Wooddale Avenue
• Quentin Avenue from 40th Street to Excelsior Boulevard
• Texas Avenue from Cedar Lake Road to Franklin Avenue
• 22nd Street from Texas Avenue to Quebec Drive
• Glenhurst Avneue from 39th Street to 3830 Glenhurst Avenue
• Oregon Avenue from 32nd Street to 3149 Oregon Avenue
• Vallacher Avenue from Quentin Avenue to 4915 Vallacher Avenue
• 40th Street from Quentin Avenue to 4001 Quentin Avenue
• 40th Street from Quentin Avenue to Wooddale Avenue
In addition, there are Connect the Park! sidewalk, trail, and bikeway segments that are being
constructed in conjunction with the 2015 MSA Street Rehabilitation Project 4015-1100 along
Walker/ 36th Street that is being awarded on May 4, 2015.
A short segment of the Connect the Park! sidewalk along 14th Street from Independence Avenue
to Wayzata Boulevard was approved for construction with the Pavement Management Project-
Area 3 - Project # 4015-1003 at the April 6, 2015 council meeting.
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on March 26, 2015. In
addition, plans and specifications are noticed on the City Website and are made available
electronically via the internet by our vendor QuestCDN.com. Email notification was provided to
five minority associations and final printed plans were available for viewing at iSqFt, The Blue
Book Building & Construction Network Planrooms and at City Hall.
Thirty eight contractors/vendors purchased plan sets with seven Disadvantaged Business
Enterprises (DBE) identifying themselves as subcontractors.
Construction Timeline:
Construction is anticipated to begin in late May and should be completed by late September
2015.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bid Tabulation: Municipal State Aid Project Walker / 36th Street – Project # 4015-1100
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to designate Park Construction Company the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with them in the amount of
$3,478,587.99 for the Municipal State Aid Project Walker / 36th Street – Project #4015-1100
and to Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of “No Parking” restrictions on 36th Street
between Highway 169 and Texas Avenue and on Walker Street from Texas Avenue to Louisiana
Avenue and Adopt Resolution revising stop sign at Walker Street and W. 37th Street.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to take the final step to allow this
project to move forward?
SUMMARY: A total of four (4) bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid
results is as follows:
CONTRACTOR Total AMOUNT
Park Construction Co. $3,478,587.99
Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $3,615,887.82
Valley Paving, Inc. $3,744,898.83
C.S. McCrossan, Inc. $3,997,300.96
Engineer’s Estimate $3,695,436.05
A review of the bids indicates Park Construction Company submitted the lowest responsible bid.
Park Construction has completed work for the City in the past and their work has been
acceptable.
Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to Park Construction Company in the amount of
$3,478,587.99.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The Walker/ 36th Street Project was planned for and included in the City’s adopted Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) with an estimated budget of $2,262,750. The remaining portion of
this contract consists of Connect the Park! segments, the Louisiana Oaks Parking Lot, and fiber.
This project will be funded by Municipal State Aid (MSA), the Pavement Management Fund,
Connect the Park!, Development Fund, Hennepin County (Fiber), Water Utility Fund, Sanitary
Utility Fund, and the Park Improvement Fund. Additional funding details are provided in the
discussion section of the report.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
No Parking Resolution
Stop Sign Resolution
Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Jay Hall, Utilities Superintendent
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation: Municipal State Aid Project Walker / 36th Street – Project # 4015-1100
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Bids were received on April 24, 2015 for the 2015 MSA Street
Rehabilitation Project –36th Street from Hwy. 169 to Texas Avenue, Walker Street from Texas
Avenue to Lake Street, Connect the Park! (Louisiana Avenue Trail, 32nd Street Trail), and
Louisiana Oak Parking Lot. The project includes pavement rehabilitation, 36th Street Minnehaha
Creek Bridge redecking, upgrade of 3 signal systems, storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and
watermain, replacement, sidewalk replacement, and the construction of new sidewalk and trail.
Walker / 36th Street is a MSA road and must meet MSA standards to qualify for funding.
The selection of Walker / 36th Street was based on condition surveys and field evaluations to
determine current conditions of the pavement, curb and gutter, and the city’s underground
utilities. Staff members from Operations and Engineering worked together to recommend
appropriate rehabilitation techniques for inclusion for this year’s project.
There are three signal systems on 36th Street that will be upgraded as part of this project. The
signals are located at the intersections with Boone Avenue, Aquila Avenue, and Texas Avenue.
Flashing yellow arrows (FYA) will be added to improve the flow of traffic trying to make left
hand turns. New curb ramps with Audible Pedestrian Signals (APS) will also be installed to
make the intersections more pedestrian friendly.
This project is located within the Reilly Tar and Chemical Superfund Site. Summit
Environmental has completed the Response Action Plan (RAP) with the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
As a part of Connect the Park! initiative, bikeways and sidewalk will be added to Walker / 36th
Street. In areas where the street is wide enough, a 5 ft bike lane will be provided. In areas where
a 5 ft bike lane is not feasible, wide outside lanes will be provided to accommodate bikers. New
sidewalk will be added on the north side of Walker Street between Texas Avenue and Quebec.
Sidewalk will also be added on the south side of Walker Street between Quebec Avenue and
37th Street. A new trail will be constructed on the north side of Walker Street adjacent to
Louisiana Oak Park.
Parking will be restricted as a requirement to meet state aid standards. With the addition of bike
lanes and wide outside lanes, the road is not of sufficient width to allow parking. No parking
will be allowed on both sides of 36th Street from Highway 169 to Texas Avenue and on both
sides of Walker Street from Texas Avenue to Louisiana Avenue.
The stop sign at the intersection of Walker Street and 37th Street is being moved due to the
reconfiguration of the intersection. Engineering completed traffic counts in the area and
determined that most cars traveling through this intersection continue on Walker Street. The
intersection was realigned to make Walker the through street and 37th the stop condition. The
stop signs on Walker Street will need to be removed and a new stop sign added to 37th Street at
Walker Street. A resolution for the stop sign at the intersection is attached.
Walker/ 36th Street will remain open to residents who live along the corridor during construction.
Engineering will contact the residents and business owners along the corridor to remind them of
the upcoming construction.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4e) Page 3
Title: Bid Tabulation: Municipal State Aid Project Walker / 36th Street – Project # 4015-1100
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on March 19, 2015. In
addition, plans and specifications are noticed on the City Website and are made available
electronically via the internet by our vendor Quest CDN.com. Email notification was provided
to five minority associations and final printed plans were available for viewing at iSqFt and The
Blue Book Building & Construction Network Planrooms and at City Hall.
Forty one contractors/vendors purchased plan sets with four Disadvantaged Business Enterprises
(DBE) identifying themselves as subcontractors.
Financial Details
The MSA project contract will include two other projects. The Connect the Park! segments
located along Walker Street, 32nd Street Sidewalk, and Louisiana Trail. Also, the Louisiana
Oaks Parking Lot will be reconstructed under this contract. The location of these projects in
relation to the Reilly Superfund Site requires all of these projects to have a RAP and remove
contaminated materials. Staff feels that grouping these projects together will provide an overall
cost savings to the City.
Based on the low bid received, funding details are revised as follows:
Funding Sources
Municipal State Aid $ 2,254,357
Pavement Management Fund
Connect the Park!
Development Fund / Hennepin County
$ 107,022
$ 615,537
$ 116,400
Water Utility Fund $ 100,023
Sanitary Utility Fund
Park Improvement Fund
$ 65,021
$ 220,227
Total $ 3,478,587
Construction Timeline
Construction is tentatively planned to begin late May and should be completed by late October.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4e) Page 4
Title: Bid Tabulation: Municipal State Aid Project Walker / 36th Street – Project # 4015-1100
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION OF “NO PARKING”
RESTRICTIONS ON 36TH STREET BETWEEN HIGHWAY 169 AND
TEXAS AVENUE AND ON WALKER STREET FROM
TEXAS AVENUE TO LOUISIANA AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is rehabilitating 36th Street and Walker Street
between Highway 169 and Louisiana Avenue, and;
WHEREAS, bike lanes and wide outside lanes will be provided to accommodate bikers,
and;
WHEREAS, Municipal State Aid standards restrict parking on this road due to
insufficient width, and;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that the Engineering Director is hereby authorized to install the following
controls.
1. No parking on both sides of 36th Street between Highway 169 and Texas Avenue.
2. No parking on both sides of Walker Street between Texas Avenue and Louisiana Avenue.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2015
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4e) Page 5
Title: Bid Tabulation: Municipal State Aid Project Walker / 36th Street – Project # 4015-1100
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION REVISING STOP SIGN AT
WALKER STREET AND W 37th STREET
WHEREAS, the Engineering Director has reported to the City Council of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota regarding the feasibility of the revision of the stop sign at Walker Street and W 37th
Street.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that Item # 1 of Resolution No 6700 is rescinded and the Engineering Director
is hereby authorized:
1. Remove existing stop signs on Walker Street at W 37th Street.
2. Install stop sign on W 37th Street at Walker Street.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2015
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
TITLE: Traffic Study No. 653: Authorize Installation of “No Parking” Restrictions on Toledo
Avenue & Wooddale Avenue
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing installation of “No
Parking” restrictions on Toledo Avenue from Wooddale Avenue to 125 feet South of Wooddale
Avenue.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The restriction is allowed per the City’s established regulatory
authority.
SUMMARY: The city has received a petition from residents on the 4000 Toledo Avenue South
block. The petition has requested the City of St. Louis Park to install “No Parking” signage on
both sides of the Toledo Avenue between Wooddale Avenue and 125 feet south of Wooddale
Avenue. The petition cites concerns about the dangers that the curve on Toledo Avenue poses
on pedestrians and automobiles. The residents of the petition believe that the parking restriction
would be helpful in preventing accidents. The attached map shows the area that the petition is
asking for the “No Parking” restrictions.
According to the Traffic Policy adopted by City Council, the City Council may consider traffic
requests when 70% or more residents with 600 ft. of the traffic request location sign a petition.
This requirement has been met.
PUBLIC INPUT: See the supporting petition document signed by residents on the 4000 Toledo
Avenue block.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost of enacting these controls is
minimal and will come out of the general operating budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Map
Petition
Letter
Prepared by: Aaron Wiesen, Civil Engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: TS No. 653: Authorize Installation of “No Parking” Restrictions on Toledo Ave & Wooddale Ave
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION OF
“NO PARKING” – RESTRICTIONS ON TOLEDO AVENUE FROM
WOODDALE AVENUE TO 125 FEET SOUTH OF WOODDALE AVENUE
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 653
WHEREAS, the city has received a petition from residents on the 4000 Toledo Avenue
South block to install “No Parking” signage on both sides of the Toledo Avenue between
Wooddale Avenue and 125 feet south of Wooddale Avenue due to safety concerns.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The Engineering Director is hereby authorized to install ‘No Parking” restrictions on
Toledo Avenue from Wooddale Avenue to 125 feet south of Wooddale Avenue.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2015
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4f) Page 3
Title: TS No. 653: Authorize Installation of “No Parking” Restrictions on Toledo Ave & Wooddale Ave
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 653
TOLEDO AVENUE FIGURE
(NO PARKING)
PROPOSED NO
PARKING
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4f) Title: TS No. 653: Authorize Installation of “No Parking” Restrictions on Toledo Ave & Wooddale AvePage 4
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4f) Title: TS No. 653: Authorize Installation of “No Parking” Restrictions on Toledo Ave & Wooddale AvePage 5
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4f) Title: TS No. 653: Authorize Installation of “No Parking” Restrictions on Toledo Ave & Wooddale AvePage 6
Comments from Harvey Meyer, 4044 Toledo Ave. S.:
I live at 4044 Toledo Ave. S., adjacent to the entrance to the Wooddale Flats development. I,
too, am concerned about possible safety issues involving pedestrians and vehicles exiting
Wooddale Flats and taking a right or left turn onto Toledo Avenue. Banning parking on both
sides of the street on the stretch of Toledo Avenue from the corner of the 4000 Toledo Avenue
and Wooddale Avenue intersection to the Wooddale Flats entrance would seem to improve
sightlines for drivers. However, I am also concerned that if such a parking ban was instituted,
Wooddale Flats residents and visitors will be encouraged to park in front of my house. That’s
because for six months or so Wooddale Flats construction workers have regularly parked in
front of my house, effectively preventing me from having that parking option. I haven’t
protested during the construction period, because I assumed it would end at some point. But if
Wooddale Flats residents and visitors are prohibited from parking on both sides of the streets
on that stretch of Toledo Avenue, some, and perhaps many, will seek nearby parking where it is
legal—in front of my house and perhaps my neighbor’s home.
Thus, I propose a compromise of sorts: Ban parking on the southern side of that Toledo Avenue
stretch (the side adjacent to Paul Fielder’s property at 4000 Wooddale Ave. S.) but allow it on
the northern side. That would allow Wooddale Flats residents and visitors a close‐by parking
option, help address traffic concerns, and perhaps discourage folks from parking in front of my
house and perhaps my neighbor’s house. Then I suggest monitoring the traffic for a designated
period. If it indeed poses an unsafe pedestrian and traffic situation, then parking on the
northern side of that stretch of Toledo Avenue should also be prohibited. If that should occur,
parking should also be strongly encouraged within Wooddale Flats itself, particularly for
visitors. If vehicles should continue to park in front of my house and my neighbor’s house, then
a permanent no‐parking sign should be installed on Toledo Avenue near my house. As a point of
interest, in the last several weeks a couple of what appear to be temporary no‐parking signs
have been installed on Toledo Avenue near my house. And construction parking there has
indeed stopped, which I’m grateful for. But I don’t know if the no‐parking signs are city‐
sanctioned. (I couldn’t immediately determine that in a phone call to City Hall.) My concern is
what will happen after this (May 4) council meeting and these temporary no‐parking signs are
removed. It would seem that construction parking would again resume in front of my and my
neighbor’s house, later followed by parking from Wooddale Flats residents and visitors.
I want to emphasize that I have not lobbied against Wooddale Flats, which seems to be a well‐
considered development that will add additional housing options for the city of St. Louis Park.
Developer David Carlson has so far listened and responded to my concerns. But I also believe it
should be duly noted that I have made ongoing sacrifices during the six‐plus months of
construction on the development. And so have other neighbors.
Thank you for taking my comments into consideration. I plan on attending the Monday, May 4
city council meeting. So if any councilors have questions for me, I will be glad to try to address
them.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4f)
Title: TS No. 653: Authorize Installation of “No Parking” Restrictions on Toledo Ave & Wooddale Ave Page 7
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Traffic Study No. 654: Authorize Installation of Parking Restrictions at 4811, 4813, &
4815 Excelsior Boulevard
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Authorize Installation of Parking
Restrictions along Excelsior Boulevard at 4811, 4813, and 4815.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The restriction is allowed per the City’s established regulatory
authority.
SUMMARY: This report considers the proposed installation of parking restrictions along the
south side of the 4800 block of Excelsior Boulevard and recommends the City Council authorize
the parking restrictions (see attached map).
Recently the city has received a request to change the parking limit time of the parking bay in
front of 4811, 4813, & 4815 Excelsior Boulevard. The parking bay is currently unsigned and has
no restrictions on parking. The request is to change the parking limit to 1 hour. During a site
visit it was noted that other parking bays along Excelsior Boulevard were signed as either 1 hour
or 2 hour parking limits. Discussions with the business owners indicate a 1 hour parking
restriction is adequate for their customers. Given the conditions identified, staff is of the opinion
that the installation of the parking restriction appears to be an appropriate means of improving
parking availability in the area.
PUBLIC INPUT: A letter was mailed to adjacent property owners in March requesting
comments on the proposed installation of parking restrictions. No objections were received.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost of enacting these controls is
minimal and will come out of the general operating budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Map
Prepared by: Aaron Wiesen, Civil Engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: TS No. 654: Authorize Installation of Parking Restrictions at 4811, 4813, & 4815 Excelsior Boulevard
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION INSTALLING PARKING RESTRICTION ALONG
EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD AT 4811, 4813, AND 4815
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 654
WHEREAS, the Engineering Director has reported to the City Council of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota regarding the feasibility of installing 1 hour parking restrictions along 4811, 4813,
and 4815 Excelsior Boulevard.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that the Engineering Director is hereby authorized to install 1 hour parking
restrictions along 4811, 4813, and 4815 Excelsior Boulevard.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2015
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 3
Title: TS No. 654: Authorize Installation of Parking Restrictions at 4811, 4813, & 4815 Excelsior Boulevard
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 654
4811, 4813, 4815 Excelsior Boulevard
(1 HOUR PARKING)
N
CURRENT: NO RESTRICTIONS
PROPOSED: 1 HR PARKING
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4h
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bid Tabulation: Street Maintenance Project – Sealcoat Streets in Areas 7 & 8 – Project
No. 4015-1200
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to designate Pearson Brothers, Inc. the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of
$433,536.88 for Street Maintenance Project (Sealcoat Streets-Areas 7&8 – Project No. 4015-
1200).
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to approve this contract which continues
the City’s street sealcoat program?
SUMMARY: A total of two (2) bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid
results is as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Pearson Brothers Inc. $433,536.88
Allied Blacktop Company $452,229.63
A review of the bids indicates Pearson Brothers, Inc. submitted the lowest bid. Pearson Brothers
is a reputable contractor that has worked for the City before. Staff recommends that a contract
be awarded to the firm in the amount of $433,536.88.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project was planned for and included
in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program with an estimated budget of $543,518.
Based on the low bid received and other expenses the, total project costs are now estimated at
$485,561.31. The expense for sealcoating the local streets will be paid from the City’s Pavement
Management Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Seal Coat 2015 Maps
Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation: Street Maintenance Project – Sealcoat Streets in Areas 7 &8 – Project No. 4015-1205
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Sealcoating is the surface application of an asphalt material followed by the
placement of aggregate (rock) which is embedded into the asphalt material while it is liquid. The
purpose of this treatment is to add surface friction to the pavement, to seal the surface from
oxidation and protect the pavements from the effects of moisture. Sealcoating can
extend the life of a pavement, in good condition, by 5-9 years. The City’s Pavement
Management Program provides for the sealcoating of each street once every eight (8) years.
Areas 7 and 8 of the Pavement Management Program are scheduled for sealcoating in
2015. These streets were last sealcoated in 2007. These areas comprise the streets in the
Cedarhurst, Lake Forest, Fern Hill, Eliot, Eliot View and Willow Park neighborhoods. Maps of
the streets and parking lots to be sealcoated are attached.
Areas 7 and 8 were combined this year to conform to the adjusted the rotation of the pavement
Management areas. Not all streets in Areas 7 and 8 will be sealcoated. Based on the City’s
pavement management software and visual inspections by City staff, some streets in these areas
were determined to be in need of more comprehensive maintenance and would not benefit from
sealcoating. Thus, they have been eliminated from this project with the understanding that they
will be programmed for rehabilitation in the future, as part of the City’s overall Pavement
Management Program.
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on March 26. In
addition, plans and specifications were noticed on the City Website and are made available
electronically via the internet by our vendor QuestCDN.com. Email notification is provided to
five minority associations and final printed plans are made available for viewing at City Hall.
Funding Details:
Based on the low bid received, total project cost and funding details are revised as follows:
Expenditures
Construction Cost $433,536.88
Engineering & Administration (12%) $ 52,024.43
Total $485,561.31
Revenues
Pavement Management Funds Total $485,561.31
This project was planned for and included in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program
with an estimated budget of $543,518.
Construction Timeline:
The work may begin as early as June but must be completed no later than August 30. The
contractor will schedule a week to complete the work within this time frame. Streets will be
posted for “No Parking” beginning the day before work is to occur. Staff will send a notice out
to residents once we get a schedule to inform them of the pending work and parking restrictions.
27TH
WAYZATA
LOUISIANACEDA
R L
A
K
E
TEXASJERSEYKENTUCKY16TH
23RD
22ND IDAHO24THNEVADA COLORADO26TH
25TH 18THALABAMAMARYLANDELIOT
VI
E
W
14TH
DAKOTAGEORGIAQUEBEC
FLORIDAFRANKLIN
SUMTER13TH
13 1/2
UTAHEDGEWOODHAMPSHIREOREGONBRUNSWICKRHODE ISLANDSB HWY100
S
T
O
W
B
I
3
9
4
BLACKSTONEWB I394 TO LOUISIANA AVE S
PENNSYLVANIAVICTORI
A
LOUISIANA TRANSIT
WESTWOOD HILLSGEORGIA16TH
RHODE IS
L
A
N
D KENTUCKYEDGEWOODOREGONHAMPSHIRE14TH
DAKOTABRUNSWICK27THPENNSYLVANIA
LOUISIANA
13TH
JERSEY23RDEDGEWOOD
SUMTERPENNSYLVANIA18TH
QUEBECFLORIDA18TH
22ND IDAHO14TH
IDAHOOREGON22ND
RHODE ISLANDNEVADACOLORADOALABAMA16TH 16TH
OREGON26TH
18TH
FRANKLIN
DAKOTAEDGEWOOD23RD
HAMPSHIRE§¨¦394 §¨¦394
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000Feet
¯Area 7 Sealcoat 2015
Legend
Sealcoat (2015)
City Limits
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Bid Tabulation: Street Maintenance Project – Sealcoat Streets in Areas 7 &8 – Project No. 4015-1205 Page 3
28TH
26TH
FRANCE16TH
27TH
SALEMVERNONWEBSTERALABAMATOLEDOLYNN29TH RALEIGH25 1/2
XENWOODCEDA
R L
A
K
E
MINNETONKA INGLEWOODUTICACOLORADO394 HOV
ZARTHANHUNTINGTONPARK PLACEEB I394 TO SB HWY100 S
JOPPAKIPLINGFOREST
ALLEYGLENHURSTDUKEWAYZATA
SUNSET
LAKESB HWY100 S TO WB I394
NB HWY100 S TO EB I394
23RD
BASSWOOD
YOSEMITEBARRY QUENTINGAMBLE
14TH
31ST
WB I394 TO NB H
W
Y
1
0
0
S
OTTAWA25THRIDGECEDARWOODNATCHEZPARKDALE
EB I394 TO PARK PLA
C
E
B
L
V
D
WESTSIDE 24THHILLWEST ENDPRINCETONPARKWOODSDOUGLAS
BRUNSWICKPARKLANDSBLACKSTONEMONTEREY
SERVICE
D
R
HI
G
H
W
A
Y
7
WB I394 TO SB HWY100 S
HIGHW
O
O
D
EB I394 TO NB HWY100 S
SB HWY100 S TO PARKD DRCEDA
R
SB HWY100 S TO EB I394
DREWNB HWY100 S TO WB I394
OLD CEDAR LAKE
18TH
WILLOWWESTRIDGEJEWISH C
C
T
U
R
N
A
R
O
U
N
D
PRIVATEC
E
D
A
RW
O
O
D
25TH
OTTAWA26TH
RALEIGH26TH
QUENTINNATCHEZBLACKSTONEMONTEREYCEDAR LAKE
JOPPA16TH
26TH
BLACKSTONEMONTEREYPRINCETONALABAMAUTICAYOSEMITEWEBSTERBRUNSWICK16TH
29THZARTHAN 27THCOLORADO
28TH JOPPACEDAR
L
A
K
E
28TH
ALABAMA28TH
SALEM27TH
JOPPAGLEN
H
U
R
S
T
MONTEREYTOLEDOLYNNZARTHANWAYZATA
GLENHURSTPRINCETON29TH UTICAPARK PLACENATCHEZ27TH
PRINCETONWB I394 TO SB HWY100 S¬«100
¬«100
¬«100
§¨¦394
")17
")5
§¨¦394
")25
")25
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000Feet
¯Area 8 Sealcoat 2015
Legend
Sealcoat (2015)
City Limits
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4h)
Title: Bid Tabulation: Street Maintenance Project – Sealcoat Streets in Areas 7 &8 – Project No. 4015-1205
Page 4
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to approve the allocation of neighborhood
grants for 2015/2016?
SUMMARY: Each year grant funding is made available to neighborhood associations to
promote strong neighborhoods and enhance community connections by bringing neighbors
together. Grant applications from 21 neighborhoods were received in March. On April 8th
Breanna Erickson facilitated the grant review process with Grant Review Committee Members
Erica Bagstad (Westwood Hills), Kim Curran-Moore (Willow Park), Darla Monson (City Staff)
and Brian Johnson (Minikahda Oaks). The Grant Review Committee met to review the grant
applications and make funding recommendations to the City Council. Attached is a worksheet
that provides specific detail on the recommendations made by the Grant Review Committee.
Note that staff provided a written report on the recommendations for the Councils 4/27 meeting.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Grant Review Committee recommends
approval of $31,000 to fund the following 21 neighborhood grants:
$1240 Aquila $1650 Birchwood $1706 Blackstone
$1495 Bronx Park $660 Brooklawns $1700 Brookside
$1600 Browndale $1500 Cobblecrest $1510 Creekside
$500 Crestview $1450 Eliot View $1750 Elmwood
$1750 Fern Hill $1255 Lake Forest $1300 Lenox
$1750 Minikahda Oaks $1230 Minikahda Vista $1750 Minnehaha
$1750 Sorensen $1705 South Oak Hill $1750 Westwood Hills
The Grant Review Committee recommends approval of $1835 to fund the environmental grants
for nineteen neighborhoods.
The Grant Review Committee recommends approval of $4800 to fund insurance purchases for
thirteen neighborhoods.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
2015 Neighborhood Grant Guidelines
2015 Neighborhood Grant Worksheet
Prepared by: Breanna Erickson, Community Liaison
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Each year grant funding is made available to neighborhood associations to
promote strong neighborhoods and enhance community connections by bringing neighbors
together. The City Council appropriated $31,000 in grant funds for the 2015 neighborhood grant
program, $2,000 for environmental initiatives, and $15,000 for insurance. Organized St. Louis
Park neighborhood associations may apply for up to $2,000 annually to support activities,
operations and community building activities and up to $100 for environmental related activities.
Neighborhood Associations are responsible for providing insurance when planning
neighborhood events in parks that bring outside equipment into the park such as, but not limited
to, moonwalks, petting zoos, etc. Neighborhood associations can apply for a maximum of $500
in addition to the standard grant to assist with purchasing insurance.
Grant applications from 21 neighborhoods were received in March. The total grant request for
2015/2016 was $36,531. Thirteen of these neighborhoods also applied for additional insurance
reimbursements and fourteen neighborhoods applied for the environmental funding. The Grant
Review Committee that met April 8th evaluated each grant application and made funding
recommendations to meet the $31,000 budget for the neighborhood grants. The grant
applications came in $5,531 over budget so the committee was forced to make reductions to all
of the neighborhoods. The 2015 Neighborhood Grant Guidelines state that garage sales will be
given the lowest priority, and, if grant requests exceed the amount available for funding, garage
sales will not be funded. For 2015/2016 the committee chose not to fund garage sales since this
is a revenue generating activity for participants. Based off of the Grant Guidelines, the
Committee then reviewed the lowest priority items and cut from those activities first. The
decision was then made to cap the maximum amount distributed to $1,750 per neighborhood,
which was implemented in order to meet the $31,000 budget. The committee made up of three
residents and one city staff member did an excellent job evaluating each grant against the grant
guidelines and making cuts to stay within budget and meet the goal of the grants which is to
support neighborhoods and enhance community connections by bringing neighbors together.
In previous years, it appeared that the criteria for obtaining the grant funding had not been
followed as closely as it should be. For example, to obtain grant funding the neighborhood
should be organized with a board of directors and bylaws, and should describe in its application
how they actively solicited in a timely fashion the neighborhood’s input on the grant application.
This year, neighborhoods were given clear instruction on the importance of being thorough on
the application and meeting the application requirements. The 2015 applications reflected the
given additional instruction.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 3
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION PROGRAM
2015/2016 GRANT GUIDELINES
Grant Purpose
In 1996, the City of St. Louis Park established this grant program to support neighborhoods and
enhance community connections by bringing neighbors together. Financial support is provided
for special projects initiated by neighbors to address issues, implement ideas or create
opportunities that are meaningful and important to their neighborhoods. This purpose still
applies today and supports the Vision Strategic Direction: St. Louis Park is committed to being
a connected and engaged community.
In 2015/2016, up to $31,000 in grants will be available to organized St. Louis Park
neighborhoods for activities that physically improve the neighborhood, enhance the sense of
community within the neighborhood, support citizen involvement, or develop neighborhood
leadership.
Environmental Grant: An additional $2,000 in grants will be available to neighborhoods that
incorporate an environmental component either in conjunction with an existing event or adding a
new program/event. This new grant element ties to the Vision Strategic Direction: 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.
Money is also available for neighborhood associations seeking additional insurance for
neighborhood activities. More information is available on page 3 under “Funding for
Insurance”.
Eligible Activities
Examples of eligible uses for grant funds are: newsletters, meetings, postage, picnics, parties,
youth or senior programs, new neighbor welcome, hayrides, ice cream socials, children’s
parades, entrance signs, flower plantings, park improvements or community gardens. However,
neighborhoods are not limited to these examples. Residents are encouraged to be creative in
assessing their needs and determining the projects they want to undertake as a neighborhood.
Neighborhood leaders are required to include neighborhood resident input for proposed
projects. How you choose to receive this input must be included in the grant application.
A few examples of eligible expenses for the environmental component are: purchasing
environmentally friendly products for a neighborhood event, hosting an earth day or buckthorn
removal event, and working with our Parks & Rec department to add plants or recycling
containers to a park.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 4
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Eligible Applicants
To qualify, a neighborhood must have an established formal neighborhood association with
elected officers and a method of transferring leadership from one year to the next. A
neighborhood association must have written bylaws approved by its membership. Bylaws
should be reviewed annually.
Matching Grant Funds
To qualify for a grant, a neighborhood must demonstrate how it will contribute to or leverage the
Neighborhood Revitalization grant funds. A match of neighborhood resources maximizes the
use of limited City funds and confirms the commitment from each neighborhood.
Neighborhoods should provide a 100% (dollar for dollar) match to the grant amount. Any
combination of sources is acceptable in calculating the neighborhood match. These can be in the
form of:
• cash raised through fundraising • fees collected at activities
• donations from businesses, civic groups, etc. • in-kind services or sweat equity
Innovative Projects
The neighborhood activity can not duplicate a service already in place.
Improvements to Private Property
Neighborhoods should be aware that legal issues limit the use of City funds to improve private
property. Applicants should be able to clearly demonstrate a strong public purpose for funds
proposed to improve private property in any way.
Improvements to Public Land or Parks
Physical improvements to any public property must be coordinated with the appropriate City
department. It should not conflict with or duplicate a project in the City’s Capital Improvements
Program. A letter of feasibility must be included with a grant application that requests funding
for park improvements. This letter should confirm that the appropriate City department has
reviewed the proposed improvements, that the proposal is feasible, and that the project budget is
a reasonable estimate of project costs.
City department contacts for capital improvements;
• Rick Beane, Parks and Recreation Department, 952-928-2854
Old Grants
Neighborhoods with a previous grant must close out their account before new grant funds are
awarded. The deadline to close out 2014 grants is April 30, 2015. Neighborhoods that received
a lump sum advance amount for a 2014 grant must turn in all outstanding receipts or reimburse
the city for funds not used.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 5
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
2015/2015 Grant Deadlines
2015/16 grants will run from May 1, 2015 to April 30, 2016. All receipts for expenses incurred
in 2015 should be turned in by January 31, 2016. All 2016 receipts are due by May 1, 2016.
Funding Priorities
Up to $31,000 is available for grants to neighborhoods in this funding cycle, including $2,000 for
environmental components. However, with 27 organized neighborhoods eligible for funds, the
process is competitive. Neighborhood leaders are advised to request funds for their most
important needs. During the grant review process, greater consideration will be given to
proposals that enhance community connections and show a greater match amount. Lesser
consideration will be given to proposals for park improvements and proposals that show a large
expenditure for a single activity. Garage sales will be given the lowest priority. If grant requests
exceed the amount available for funding, garage sales will not be funded.
Funding for Insurance
When planning neighborhood events in parks, you may be required to make provisions to use
your own insurance. Neighborhood Associations are responsible for providing outside insurance
when planning neighborhood events in parks that bring outside equipment into the park such as,
but not limited to moonwalks, petting zoos, etc. Without clear delineation of who is responsible
in case of accidents, neighborhood leaders may be held liable.
To assist neighborhood associations with purchasing additional insurance, you can apply for a
maximum of $500 per neighborhood in addition to the standard grant request. This money is
strictly for insurance and cannot be used for any other reimbursement.
Award Limits
Group activities, social events and meetings are considered for funding up to a maximum
of $800 per activity.
There is a $2000 grant award limit per neighborhood for all requests. Any neighborhood
requesting more than $1500 is advised to include priority preferences on their application.
Neighborhoods can apply for up to $100 for environmental projects.
$500 per neighborhood is available for the purchase of insurance.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 6
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Grant Process Steps
1. Apply
Applications must be received by 4:30 p.m. on Monday, March 23rd, 2015. They may be
mailed or hand-delivered to Breanna Erickson, Community Liaison, City of St. Louis Park,
3015 Raleigh Ave. South, St. Louis Park, MN 55416. Grants may also be submitted by email
to berickson@stlouispark.org or faxed to 952-924-2676. Any applications received after the
deadline will not be eligible to receive a grant. Please email Breanna if you would like to
receive an electronic grant application.
2. Review Time
City staff and a committee of volunteer neighborhood leaders will review the grant proposals
and make recommendations for approval to the City Manager.
3. Final Approval
Final authorization of the awards will be approved at a City Council Meeting late April or
early May.
4. Signed Agreements
Within two weeks of approval, each recipient neighborhood will receive a grant agreement
from the City. The agreement must be signed and returned prior to any funds being released.
Pre-application Assistance
All applicants are strongly encouraged to talk to city staff as they work to identify projects and
put together their applications. This will help to ensure complete and accurate applications, as
well as streamline application review.
Electronic Application
Contact Breanna Erickson at berickson@stlouispark.org or 952-924-2184 if you would like an
electronic application (Microsoft Excel) emailed to you.
Questions?
Contact Breanna Erickson, Community Liaison
at (952) 924-2184 or berickson@stlouispark.org
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 7
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
2015/2016 Neighborhood Grant Awards
The Grant Review Committee reviewed 21 neighborhood grants that were received in
March, 2015.
Total grant requests significantly exceeded the 2015 grant budget of $31,000 so many
neighborhoods did not receive their full request. No Garage Sales were funded for
2014/2015 and the maximum grant awarded is $1750. Grant requests for insurance
came in under budget and all insurance requests were funded fully. Environmental
requests came in under budget so transfers from the neighborhood grant to the
environmental grant component were made where appropriate.
The 2015/2016 grant period begins May 1, 2015 and ends April 30, 2016.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 8
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Requested
Amount
Recommended Amount
$1,250 Aquila $1,240
$450 Picnic/Annual Meeting
Cut $10 for gift cards $650 Postage/Newsletter
$65 Dinner with Neighbors
$75 Aquila Book Club & Story night
$50 Insurance Request $50
$100 Trail Clean Up $100
$1,950 Birchwood $1,650
$500 Ice Cream Social/Summer Party
Move $100 to environmental
component for reusing signs,
cut new signage expense
$150 Newsletter
$700 Winter Party
$300 Movie Night
$0 New Signage
$100 Upkeep for Reusable Neighborhood Signs $100
$500 Insurance Request $100
$1,981 Blackstone $1,706
$306 Porta Potty
Cut $85 for Volunteer
Appreciation; cut $30 for
office supplies; cut $100 for
Annual Elections and
Activity Fee
$160 Blackstone Park Lawn & Trees
$190 2015 Kick Off Party
$170 Summer Gathering
$75 Ice Cream Float Social
$445 National Night Out
$215 Pizza Night
$100 Election/Winter Gathering
$160 Operating Support
$100 Insurance Request $100
$100 Flowers for Blackstone Park $100
$1,855 Bronx Park $1,495
$700 Annual Neighborhood Picnic Cut $60 for general
meeting expenses; cut
$200 for printing
Newsletters; cut $100 for
Honorarium
$100 General Meeting Expenses
$200 Neighborhood Newsletter
$495 Children & Family Social Activities
$200 Insurance Request $200
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 9
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Requested
Amount
Recommended Amount
$825 Brooklawns $660
$200 Kid's Halloween Party Moved $45 from General
Expenses (rain garden tour)
to Environmental
Component; cut $100 for
door prizes at Halloween
Event; cut $20 for prizes at
Egg Hunt
$200 Little Free Library
$45 Rain Garden Tour
$20 Egg Hunt
$260 Neighborhood Summer Get Together
$95
Fall Garden Planter Swap & Rain Garden
Tour $95
$2,000 Brookside $1,700
$500 National Night Out
Cut $300 for prizes
$250 Annual Meeting
$250 Movie Nights at Jackley Park
$100 Patriotic Bike Parade
$100 Skating Parties at Jackley Park
$100 Welcome Baskets
$50 Halloween Party
$0 Progressive Dinners
$0 Block Captain Initiative
$200 Ice Cream Social
$150 Porta Potty at Jackley (shared with Creekside)
$150 Insurance Request $150
$100 Weed and Clean up Noise Wall $100
$2,000 Browndale $1,600
$0 Newsletter
Cut $400 for Newsletter
$600 Fall Bonfire & Bluegrass
$500 Family Camp Outs
$100 Winterfest
$150 Spring Egg Hunt
$125 Earth Day Children's Event
$125 July 4th Kiddie Parade
$500 Insurance Request $500
$100 Earth Day Clean Up $100
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 10
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Requested
Amount
Recommended Amount
$1,600 Cobblecrest $1,500
$800 Hayride/Family Day at Aquila Cut $100 for Prizes $700 Newsletter
$500 Insurance Request $500
$1,745 Creekside $1,510
$75 Neighborhood Flower Urn
Cut $125 for prizes at
Block Party; cut $25 from
Admin Costs; move $60
from Butterfly Garden to
Environmental
Component
$575 Block party
$250 Porta Potty at Jackley (shared with Brookside)
$50 Administrative Costs and Annual Meeting
$300 Winter Activity
$540 Butterfly Garden
$50 National Night Out
$100 Creekside Cleanup & Butterfly Garden $100
$500 Insurance Request $500
$600 Crestview $500
$125 Reusable Signage Move $100 from Reusable
Signage to Environmental
Component $375 Tent for Picnic/Rental
$100 Reusable Signage $100
$1,650 Eliot View $1,450
$600 Annual Picnic & Election Move $100 from
Neighborhood Signs to
Environmental Component;
Cut $50 from picnic and $50
from youth activity for prizes
$400 Youth Activity/Fitness
$450 2 Plastic signs for neighborhood Events
$100 Reusable Signage $100
$2,125 Elmwood $1,750
$625 Summer Picnic Cut from general expenses to
meet new maximum award
amount. Cut $25 for childcare
at annul meeting, cut $150
from signs for neighborhood
events (lowest priority on
application).
$400 Kids Halloween and Pumpkin Carving Party
$400 Bowling Party
$25 Annual Meeting
$0 Signs for Neighborhood Events
$300 Porta Potty at Central
$100 Porta Potty Rental $100
$500 Insurance $500
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 11
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Requested
Amount
Recommended Amount
$1,960 Fern Hill $1,750
$500 Two Movie Nights Cut from general expenses
to meet new maximum
award distribution
$0 Fall/Winter Event
$250 Open Eye Figure Theater Puppet Show
$1,000 Neighborhood Place Making- Plants & Signs
$100 Neighborhood Place Making- Plants $100
$1,300 Lake Forest $1,255
$600 Neighborhood Annual Summer Party Cut $20 from general
supplies, and moved $25
from garden upkeep to
environmental
component.
$280 National Night Out Block parties
$50 General Association Supplies
$175 Neighborhood Fend and sign maintenance
$150 Neighborhood Garden Upkeep
$100 Compostable Products $100
$1,800 Lenox $1,300
$600 Neighborhood Newsletter Cut $200 from promotional
mailing for Spring Social, cut
$300 form Halloween
Pumpkin Carving for coffee
mugs.
$250 Spring Social
$300 Summer picnic with Community Project
$150 Fall/Halloween Pumpkin Carving Event
$100 Reusable Coffee Mugs $100
$2,000 Minikahda Oaks $1,750
$250 Spring Egg Hunt
Cut $50 from Annual Picnic
for prizes, cut $200 from
general funds to meet new
maximum amount distributed
$150 Summer Fall Social/National Night Out
$500 Annual Picnic and election
$150 Plantings
$700 Holiday Progressive Dinner
$500 Insurance Request $500
$100 Bass Lake Clean Up $100
$1,585 Minikahda Vista $1,230
$0 Neighborhood Plant Swap Cut $125 from Neighborhood
Plant Swap for prizes, moved $40
from Plant Swap to
Environmental Component, cut
$50 from annual meeting for
flyers, cut $140 for printing
newsletter
$150 Annual Meeting
$85 Neighborhood Newsletter
$995 National Night Out
$300 Insurance Request $300
$40 Neighborhood Plant Swap $40
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 12
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Requested
Amount
Recommended Amount
$2,300 Minnehaha $1,750
$625 National Night Out Cut Garage Sale, and cut
$425 from general expense to
meet new maximum amount
distributed
$550 Children's Play Time
$0 Garage Sale
$575 Neighborhood BBQ
$100 Neighborhood Clean Up $100
$2,000 Sorensen $1,750
$690 Neighborhood Newsletters Cut $100 from Annual
Business Meeting, Cut $150
from general expenses to
meet new maximum amount
distributed
$575 Annual Fall Social
$170 Annual Sorensen Business Meeting
$240 Webster Park Porta Potty
$75 Wine and Cheese Fundraiser
$100 Environmental Experiential Education $100
$500 Insurance Request $500
$1,955 South Oak Hill $1,705
$530 Neighborhood BBQ and Potluck Cut $150 from BBQ and
Potluck for Raffle, move
$100 from Dog waste
receptical to
Environmental
Component
$250 Neighborhood Meetings
$225 Summer Ice Cream Social
$100 Dog Waste Receptical
$600 Neighborhood Movie Nights
$100 Dog Waste Receptical $100
$1,900 Westwood Hills $1,750
$400 Winter Warm Up
Cut $40 from fall party for
prizes, cut $110 from general
funds to meet new maximum
distributed amount
$150 Spring Party
$540 Neighborhood Movie Night
$270 Ladies Night
$500 Fall party
$500 Insurance Request $500
$100 Plants/bedding near Nature Center $100
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 13
Title: 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Amount Recommended
$36,531 Total Requested by All Neighborhoods $31,001
$4,800 Total Insurance Request $4,800
$1,265 Total Environmental Request $1835
* Over by $5,531
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4j
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approve Parking Lot Lease Extension with MSP Property Management for Louisiana
Oaks Park
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve a parking lot lease extension for one year
with MSP Property Management (Louisiana Oaks Apartments) to lease 20 parking spaces to
accommodate overnight guests of Louisiana Oaks apartment complex provided a permit is
displayed on the vehicle.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: This is the only contract the City has for private parking on a
City park facility.
SUMMARY: The City entered into a temporary agreement in 2004 with MSP Property
Management to allow twenty (20) parking spaces in the south row of the south lot of Louisiana
Oaks Park for overnight guest parking of the Louisiana Oaks apartment complex. Guests would
display a permit in their vehicle indicating they were from Louisiana Oaks apartment complex.
In April of 2014, staff from Engineering, Community Development and Operations and
Recreation met with MSP Property Management and, with the assistance of Attorney Tom Scott,
drafted a more formalized agreement. Under the agreement, overnight guests of Louisiana Oaks
apartment complex were allowed to park in the designated area of the south parking lot of
Louisiana Oaks Park provided they displayed a permit in their vehicle. MSP Property
Management printed and distributed the vehicle parking passes. MSP Property Management paid
the city $100 per space per year for twenty (20) spaces. In addition, they plowed the parking
spaces in the winter and were required to reimburse the city for any damages to the parking lot
resulting from its use.
Staff is supportive of extending the lease for another year. We have not had any problems or
complications with the previous agreement. MSP Property Management is in the process of
selling this site. The new owner may wish to continue this agreement in the future. We will
review it annually.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: MSP Property Management will pay the
City $100 per space per year to lease twenty (20) parking spaces. This funding will go into the
Operations and Recreation park maintenance budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Parking Lot Lease Extension
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Approve Parking Lot Lease Extension with MSP Property Management for Louisiana Oaks Park Page 2
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4k
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept a Donation of a Barred Owl Mount from Celeste Hill to Westwood Hills
Nature Center (Value $200)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a Barred
Owl mount from Celeste Hill for Westwood Hills Nature Center.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions
on its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Celeste Hill graciously donated an approximately one foot tall taxidermy Barred Owl Mount to
Westwood Hills Nature Center. The donation is given with the restriction that it be displayed at
Westwood Hills Nature Center. It will be displayed on a table or on the wall.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Mark Oestreich, Westwood Hills Nature Center Manager
Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: Accept a Donation of a Barred Owl Mount from Celeste Hill to Westwood Hills Nature Center (Value $200)
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
OF A BARRED OWL MOUNT (VALUED AT $200)
TO BE DISPLAYED AT WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CENTER
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Celeste Hill donated a taxidermy Barred Owl Mount to Westwood Hills
Nature Center for display; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to Celeste Hill with the understanding that it
must be displayed at Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Minutes: 4l
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 1, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer, Joe Tatalovich
STAFF PRESENT: Nicole Mardell, Sean Walther, Ryan Kelley,
Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of February 25, 2015 and March 4, 2015
Commissioner Robertson moved approval of the minutes of February 25, 2015 and
March 4, 2015. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 3-0-2 (Carper and Peilen abstained).
3. Public Hearings
A. Zoning Text Amendments relative to Setbacks, Parking and Screening
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 15-10-ZA
Nicole Mardell, Community Development Intern, presented the staff report. She
explained that the amendments are requested in response to the findings of the
South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines Study. She noted that some
of the proposed changes are appropriate for the City more broadly. She stated
that many of the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning districts share common
features with the South Side of Excelsior Blvd., such as small lots, higher traffic
streets, and adjacency to residential uses. The three general categories of the
proposed amendments are yards, parking and screening.
Ms. Mardell provided analysis of proposed changes for side yards in the C-1 and
C-2 Zoning Districts, parking in all districts, parking in C-1 Zoning Districts and
Screening in C-1 Zoning Districts.
Commissioner Peilen said she was curious about the proposed requirement for
parking lots to be at least eight feet from adjacent residential properties. She said
in some cases the alleyways don’t appear to have eight feet.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4l) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2015
Ms. Mardell and Sean Walther, Senior Planner, said the existing properties would
be allowed to continue as they are until such point they do a major redevelopment
or completely re-do their parking lot. Mr. Walther said the city will need to
consider those circumstances where it is impossible to provide eight feet.
Chair Person asked staff to comment generally on the impact of the changes to
parking lots. He asked if the amendment would change the number of stalls.
Mr. Walther said the required number of parking stalls would not be changed.
The design requirements of the parking lots would change. A slightly narrower
drive aisle would be allowed and in the C-1 District only a drive aisle of 22 feet
could be provided if a wider stall is provided as well. Mr. Walther added that the
22 foot width does have some precedence in the city. A 22 foot drive aisle is
allowed in structured parking ramps.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the width of the lot could limit the
number of stalls that could be provided.
Mr. Walther responded that was possible. He added that site demonstrations
were done as part of the Design Guidelines Study with 9 feet wide stalls as a
baseline. Staff is confident it works on the lots on the south side of Excelsior
Blvd.
Chair Person asked if there is a trend to decrease the number of parking stalls.
Mr. Walther responded that there isn’t an intention to reduce the number of
parking stalls required. He provided examples of existing flexibility allowed in
the code for the number of stalls.
Chair Person opened the public hearing. As there was no one present wishing to
speak he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Carper stated that the Commission has had an opportunity to see
the study area. He remarked that the task force and staff did an excellent job
addressing the situation.
Commissioner Robertson thanked Ms. Mardell for her work and for the great
presentation.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the South
Side of Excelsior Zoning Amendments. Commissioner Johnston-Madison
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
4. Other Business
A. 2014 Planning Commission Annual Report and 2015 Work Plan
Mr. Walther said the report was provided to the Commission for review and
comment.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 4l) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 1, 2015
5. Communications
A. 2015 Report to the Community
B. Open House April 8 – Southwest LRT Station Design
C. Neighborhood Meeting – Former Bally’s Total Fitness site
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m.
A study session followed at 6:30 p.m. The study topic was Form-Based Code.
Submitted by,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design
Guidelines
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending
the zoning ordinance relating to yards, parking, and screening requirements, and to set the
Second Reading for May 18, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Do the proposed zoning ordinance text amendments help
implement the recommendations of the Excelsior Blvd Design Guidelines?
SUMMARY: Staff proposes ordinance text amendments that were recommended during the
South Side of Excelsior Boulevard Design Guidelines study process. City staff worked with a
consultant and a Task Force on Design Guidelines for the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard in
2014. The Task Force completed its study in December and the study includes recommended
amendments to the zoning code. The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed the
design guidelines at a joint meeting. Also, staff has reported on the development of the following
zoning amendments during Planning Commission Study Sessions and has prepared an ordinance
to implement the changes. The Planning Commission held a public hearing for the revised
ordinance on April 1, 2015; no one was present to speak, nor were any comments received. The
Planning Commission recommended approval of the Ordinance changes. A report regarding the
zoning changes and the design guidelines was provided at the April 27, 2015 City Council
meeting.
Some of the changes identified for the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard are also appropriate for
the City more broadly. Many of the properties in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning
districts in the City share common features with the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard, such as
being located on relatively small lots, on higher traffic streets, and adjacent to residential uses.
The proposed Zoning Ordinance provisions would not just apply to Excelsior Boulevard but also
be incorporated in C-1 and C-2 zoning districts. The proposed procedural and policy changes are
discussed in more detail later in this report.
The final Southside of Excelsior Design Guidelines document is included in the consent agenda
for acceptance.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Draft of Ordinance Changes
Prepared by: Nicole Mardell, Community Development Intern
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
DISCUSSION
Background
Planning staff has been working with a consultant and City Council appointed Task Force on
Design Guidelines for the South Side of Excelsior Boulevard. The process has included several
Task Force meetings, two neighborhood-wide meetings, and a joint review session between the
City Council and Planning Commission. The draft Design Guidelines was received in November
of 2014 and includes a section on recommended code changes. Staff has reviewed the
recommendations and proposes zoning ordinance amendments to reflect Design Guidelines in
the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts.
Policy Changes
The major policy changes included in the proposed revisions to the zoning ordinance fall into
three categories:
1. Yards
2. Parking
3. Screening
Side Yard for Corner Lots in the C-1 and C-2 Zoning Districts: The current minimum width
of a side yard abutting a street is 15 feet. The amendment decreases the minimum width of a side
yard to five feet in the C-1 and C-2 zoning districts. This will allow buildings to be closer to the
streets and sidewalks. Building placement is one contributing factor in improving the pedestrian
atmosphere of commercial corridors and intersections. Properties would still need to comply
with the visibility requirements at intersections.
To be consistent with the Design Guidelines, the code will require buildings with three or more
stories in the C-1 district to set stories above the second floor back by at least 10 feet from the
front and side property line abutting a street.
Parking in All Districts: Staff recommends reducing the minimum drive aisle width in parking
lots from 25.0 feet to 24.0 feet for 90 degree angle stalls in all zoning districts. The City has
granted several variances to allow this width in the past. Since the City has frequently
considered this width acceptable, staff recommends allowing 24.0 feet as the citywide minimum
requirement.
Parking in C-1 Zoning Districts: In the C-1 zoning district, the Design Guidelines
recommended allowing the minimum parking lot aisle width to be reduced to 22.0 feet. When
the drive aisle is less than 24.0 feet, the Planning Commission recommended requiring the
parking stall minimum width to increase to 9.0 feet. The 22.0 foot aisle width has been allowed
in parking structures within St. Louis Park and has been deemed appropriate for other areas of
the city. Due to the similarities between the C-1 Zoning District and the South Side of Excelsior
Boulevard, staff recommends applying this throughout the C-1 district.
The Design Guidelines recommend prohibiting parking in front of a building. This will promote
parking to be located in the rear or side yard, which will contribute to the pedestrian realm and
provide separations between residential and commercial buildings. Staff recommends applying
this rule to all C-1 district properties.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
Screening in C-1 Zoning Districts
To further define and enhance the buffer zone between commercial and residential properties, the
Design Guidelines recommend increasing the height of screen fences /walls from six feet to eight
feet. Also, the Design Guidelines recommend requiring parking lots to be at least eight feet from
adjacent residential properties in order to provide more distance between the parking lot and
residential uses and more land for landscaping and the screen fence. Again, staff recommends
applying this rule to all C-1 properties.
Finally, the City recently adopted an ordinance allowing fences in front yards to be 48 inches
tall. Therefore, staff recommends the height for screen fences for parking lots also change from
42 inches to 48 inches tall to be consistent with that previous amendment. Properties would still
need to comply with visibility requirements at intersections.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
ORDINANCE NO.15-____
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 36 OF THE
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE CREATING A PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Chapter 36 is amended to add the following:
Sec. 36-193. C-1 neighborhood commercial district.
***
(f) Dimensional standards/densities.
(3) A side yard abutting a street shall be a minimum of five15 feet wide for one and
two story buildings. Upper stories of buildings taller than two stories shall be setback at
least 10 feet from the side lot line adjacent to a street.
(4) The front yard shall be a minimum of five feet for one and two story buildings.
The upper stories of buildings taller than two stories shall be setback at least 10 feet
from the front lot line.
***
Sec. 36-194. C-2 general commercial district.
***
(g) Dimensional standards/densities.
(3) A side yard abutting a street shall not be less than five15 feet in width.
***
Sec. 36-361. Off-street parking areas, paved areas, and loading spaces.
***
(k) Design Requirements
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
PARKING LOT DIMENSIONS
Table 36-361 (b)
Stall Angle
(degrees)
Curb Length
(feet)
Vehicle Projection
(feet)
Aisle Width
(feet)
Total Width
(feet)
45 Standard
Compact
12.0
11.5
18.5
17.0
13.0*
50.0
60 Standard
Compact
10.0
9.5
20.0
18.0
15.0*
55.0
75 Standard
Compact
9.0
8.5
20.5
17.5
18.0*
59.0
90*** Standard
Compact
8.5
8.0
18.0
16.0
25.0 24.0
61.0 60.0**
Parallel Standard
Compact
23.0
21.0
8.5
8.0
22.0
38.0
* One-way aisles only.
** When parking is provided within a parking ramp, the total bay width may be reduced to 58
feet.
*** In a C-1 district the minimum aisle width may be reduced to 22.0 feet and a minimum total
width of 58.0 feet, with the condition that aisles less than 24.0 feet wide shall provide a
minimum curb length of 9.0 feet.
***
(10) Yards. Required parking areas shall be subject to the following requirements:
b. In the C-1, C-2, O, I-P and I-G districts, parking areas shall be permitted
in the front yard and side yards abutting a street, provided that the yard
shall not be reduced to less than five feet.
c. In the C-1 district:
1. Parking spaces and drive aisles shall not be located between a
building and a street, except that a through lot may have parking
between the building and less prominent street, as determined by the
Zoning Administrator.
2. The minimum yard requirement for parking spaces and drive aisles
shall be zero (0.0) when located adjacent to a non-residential district.
3. The minimum yard requirement for parking spaces and drive aisles
shall be eight feet when abutting a residentially zoned property.
4. The minimum yard requirement for parking spaces shall be five feet
when adjacent to a street.
***
Sec. 36-364. Landscaping
(4) Parking lots:
a. All off street parking areas and drive lanes located within 30 feet of any parcel
that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential or has an
occupied institutional building such as a school, religious institution or
community center shall be screened with landscaping and a solid fence or wall
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
a minimum of eight six feet high in the side and back rear yard and 42 48
inches in the when adjacent to a front yard. A hedge may be substituted for the
fence in the front yard only.
SECTION 2. The contents of Planning Case File 15-10-ZA are hereby entered into and made
part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its passage and publication.
Public Hearing April 1, 2015
First Reading May 4, 2015
Second Reading May 18, 2015
Date of Publication May 28, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect June 12, 2015
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8E
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt the 2015 Emergency Operations Plan.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council need additional information to make this
decision?
SUMMARY: The current Emergency Operations Plan has been in effect since 2005 without
any updates. This current plan brings the City into line with current best practices and
streamlines the plan to improve ease of use and interoperability.
Staff reviewed the draft Emergency Operations Plan with the Council at its March 9 Study
Session. No concerns were expressed by Council about the plan. Staff was asked to look further
into how we might handle a mass casualty event at city hall, which is in process.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Emergency Operations Plan
Prepared by: Steve Koering Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator (s): City of St. Louis Park Fire Department
City of St. Louis Park Police Department
City of St. Louis Park Public Works
Primary Agency(s): City of St. Louis Park Emergency Management
Support Agencies: Hennepin County Emergency Management & Homeland
Security
Local Bus Companies
Hennepin County, Metro EMS Providers
Metro Transit
Hennepin County Police Agencies
Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department
State Resources: Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT)
Minnesota State Patrol
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
Minnesota National Guard
Federal Resources: U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT)
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• St. Louis Park Evacuation Routes Maps (Major Evacuation Routes)
• St. Louis Park “Significant Sites of Concentrated Populations”
• St. Louis Park Flood Maps
• St. Louis Park FD SOPs for Radiological/Hazardous Materials
• St. Louis Park Police Department Policy & Procedure Manual
• Hennepin County Web EOC Logistics List (Verify name)
• Hennepin County Functional Annex I - Evacuation & Security
• Hennepin County Support Annex B – Evacuation
• Hennepin County Incident Annex O – Transportation Incident
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• Metro Region EMS Incident Response Plan
• 42 U.S.C. 11001-11050 EPCRA
• 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127 Transportation of Hazardous Material
ESF 1 Security, Evacuation & Traffic Control
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 2
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 2
Purpose
The purpose of this ESF is to provide guidance and direction for the coordination of
transportation services, security, evacuation, and traffic control in preparation for, during
and after an emergency or disaster. This ESF establishes plans and methods to
identify, assess and maintain emergency transportation routes during an emergency or
disaster.
ESF #1-Transportation provides support to the City of St. Louis Park and the
jurisdictions therein by assisting Federal, State, and local governmental entities,
voluntary organizations, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector in the
support and recovery of transportation systems and infrastructure during domestic
threats or in response to incidents.
Scope
Provision of transportation resource support includes coordinating transportation
activities to supplement the efforts of emergency response agencies to protect the
public. It is intended to assist in establishing priorities regarding transportation requests,
managing traffic, determining priorities of road and highway repair, and conducting
appropriate emergency management coordination with neighboring jurisdictions and
state agencies.
ESF #1 maintains considerable intermodal expertise and public and private sector
transportation stakeholder relationships. The City of St. Louis Park Public Works and
the City of St. Louis Park Engineering with the assistance of the ESF #1 support
agencies, provides support to the transportation system in domestic incident
management, including the following activities:
• Monitor and report status of and damage to the transportation system and
infrastructure as a result of the incident.
• Identify temporary alternative transportation solutions that can be implemented
by others when systems or infrastructure are damaged, unavailable, or
overwhelmed.
• Coordinate the restoration and recovery of the transportation systems and
infrastructure.
• Coordinate and support prevention, preparedness, response, recovery, and
mitigation activities among transportation stakeholders within the authorities and
resource limitations of ESF #1 agencies.
The Logistics Chief, and Emergency Management will coordinate the public and private
partners for the mass evacuation.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 3
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 3
ESF 6- Mass Care will be utilized for the sheltering and care of these individuals.
Security of the areas evacuated will be under the direction of the City of St. Louis Park
Police. All areas affected by the disaster will have an established security perimeter
until public and private buildings are re-secured.
Responsibilities
A. Within the City of St. Louis Park, the following officials, or their designees, are
responsible for determining the need to shelter in place, evacuate, and/or return,
and for issuing recommendations.
Official Type(s) of Incident(s)
Fire Chiefs or the Incident Commander Fire/Radiological/HAZMAT/All-Hazard
Police Chief/Ranking Supervisor, or the
Incident Commander
All Law Enforcement on scene
emergencies
For the following types of incidents but not limited to:
Hazardous Materials incident, Fire, Flood, Severe storm
B. Within the City of St. Louis Park, the Police Department will be responsible for
coordinating an evacuation effort. Back assistance for evacuation and traffic
control would be available from the City of St. Louis Park Fire Department and
surrounding police and fire departments per mutual aid agreements
C. The emergency management department is responsible for coordinating all
private and public transportation resources
D. The Police Department is responsible for coordinating pet evacuation and
sheltering.
SECURITY
A. Within the City of St. Louis Park, the Police Department would be responsible for
coordinating security for any large-scale evacuation that might be required.
Back-up assistance for evacuation and traffic control would be available from St.
Louis Park Police Reserves, Fire Department and Public Works Department.
Security for critical resources would be the responsibility of the Police
Department to protect life along with private and public property if any large-scale
evacuation might be required.
B. The Police Department will coordinate security for congregate care facilities.
PROCEDURES
A. Depending upon the circumstances and the urgency of the situation after
determination has been made to evacuate the area; notification will be made to
all affected persons in the area. Notification shall be made via, but not limited to,
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 4
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 4
outdoor warning siren, ParkAlert, public address system (Emergency Vehicles),
door to door, radio, cable/daily television and social media. Evacuation will be
coordinated by the Police Department. Evacuation routes are identified in St.
Louis Park Evacuation Routes Maps (Major Evacuation Routes) all major
evacuation routes have the capability to become alternate routes if needed. The
Police Department personnel would establish traffic control points as needed.
B. Damaged areas, critical facilities and resources will be secured by Police
Department personnel.
C. Depending upon the area affected, the Police Department personnel would
establish traffic control points (if needed) at major intersections.
D. Depending upon the area affected, the Emergency Coordinator and/or designee
shall determine the nearest, quickest, and safest evacuation route out of the
affected area and so direct the evacuees.
E. Maps indicating suggested evacuation route are located in the EOC and will be
made available to the Incident Commander and the Police Supervisor.
F. Evacuation routes, assembly points, and assistance instructions will be
announced.
G. The Emergency Management Coordinator or designee is responsible for
coordinating all private and public transportation resources.
H. All those affected will be provided with information on how to obtain fuel, water,
food, medicine, and/or medical aid, location of rest areas, and other information.
I. Mobility impaired individuals or those persons unable to provide their own
transportation would receive assistance from the Police/Fire Departments,
emergency management services, and Hennepin County Emergency Medical
Services. Special Needs populations will be evacuated per the Hennepin County
Emergency Plan.
J. Those affected will be alerted by public announcements for notification of when it
is safe to return.
K. The Police Department will coordinate assistance to any vehicles having
mechanical problems during the evacuation.
L. The Police Department will provide security to each congregate care facility as
determined by the Police Chief as needs are identified.
M. Return of those affected - The Police Department will be responsible for
coordinating the access and return of those affected to a secure location. A
credentialing system will be made available to assist in identifying authorized
persons.
N. Efforts shall be made by on-scene personnel to insure that access/return to the
area is obtained only by authorized personnel.
O. Pet evacuation and sheltering assistance will be coordinated by contacting
MnVOAD which can be paged via the Minnesota Duty Officer.
P. In the event of the need to evacuate/relocate Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital
patients, City of St. Louis Park Fire and Police will coordinate with Hospital staff
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 5
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 5
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex I. Evacuation and Security
Purpose
To keep and preserve the peace within the county, provide protection of life and
property, enforcement of laws, rules and ordinances, regulation and control of traffic,
Federal, State laws and local ordinances and rules, prevention of sabotage and
subversive activity (and to conduct explosive ordinance and hazardous materials
reconnaissance), investigation of causes of manmade disasters or domestic terrorism,
and coordinate search and rescue operations within Hennepin County.
Scope
The Sheriff’s Office is the primary provider of law enforcement services to various
communities within Hennepin County and provides law enforcement advice and
assistance to all county governmental offices and departments. Municipalities within
the county generally receive various levels of assistance from their own police
department. The Sheriff‘s Office may provide assistance to local law enforcement
agencies on a case-by-case basis or by previously negotiated Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) or Mutual Aid Agreement requests.
Organization
Law enforcement services, law enforcement activities, crime scene processing, traffic
control and coordination of rescue activities will be carried out by the Sheriff's Office,
and such auxiliary services as deemed necessary, using the Incident Command System
(ICS) organization as standardized in Minnesota as NIMS.
Support Annex B. Evacuation
Purpose
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Sheriff
Municipal Law Enforcement
Federal Law Enforcement
9
13
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Sheriff
Municipal Law Enforcement
Federal Law Enforcement
9
13
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 6
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 6
The purpose of this annex is to provide an overview of local government responsibilities
with respect to in-place sheltering, evacuation, traffic control and security, during a
major disaster or emergency.
A. Local Government.
The majority of evacuations or in-place sheltering takes place upon the direction of local
officials and without the involvement of state agencies. If local jurisdictions need
additional assistance or resources in order to carry out an evacuation, the Minnesota
Duty Officer (MDO) may be contacted to locate that assistance.
In the event of an escalating emergency outside city limits, the sheriff of the affected
county has the authority to recommend an evacuation or sheltering in place of
residents. Within city limits, the mayor has this authority. The county sheriff has the
authority to order a mandatory evacuation or sheltering in place, if the local government
has adopted specific ordinances addressing mandatory evacuation.
In the event of a serious incident at the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, the utility
will notify the MDO and the county warning point and may recommend evacuation or
sheltering in place. In such instances, the county sheriff has the authority to implement
the pre-determined evacuation or shelter in place protective action. The affected county
warning points are responsible for implementing their portion of the Public Alert and
Notification System (PANS), including sounding their outdoor warning sirens, should an
evacuation become necessary.
Incident Annex O. Transportation Incident
Policy
The National Transportation Safety Board Reauthorization Act of 2006, (Public Law
109-443)
Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, (Public Law 110-432)
Purpose
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
• Municipal Transportation
Departments
• Metro Transit
• Metropolitan Airports
Commission
• Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MNDOT)
Hennepin County Transportation
Department
1, 8, 9
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 7
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 7
The Hennepin County Transportation Incident annex is a hazard-specific component of
the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan. It establishes the coordinated
response in the event of a multi-casualty transportation incident. Effective response
requires coordinated efforts of emergency medical personnel, law enforcement, fire
department personnel and may include state and federal agencies. With multiple
causalities, medical personnel and the hospital will serve as critical resources.
Scope
Transportation systems in or near Hennepin County include airways, roadways, and rail
systems. All these systems provide services on a national, regional, and local basis. A
major accident is possible in any of these modes of transportation. The National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is charged by Congress with investigating every
civil aviation accident in the United States and significant accidents in other modes of
transportation – railroad, highway, marine and pipeline. Local and county
transportation departments as well as police, fire, EMS and public works also play
important roles in major accident responses.
Assumptions
• In the event of a major roadway incident, local municipalities will be
responsible for traffic control on roads within their jurisdiction.
• Outside of the affected area, unaffected transportation systems (land or rail)
should continue to function as designated, however, they should be prepared
to operate at maximum capacities during an incident or event.
• The volume of impact, area, duration, and resources needed, will determine
the level of response required.
• Travel routes will be monitored and closed at points at which travel would
become hazardous.
• Aircraft accidents, particularly commercial flights, are especially susceptible to
having mass casualties and fatalities.
• Demand for resources may be critical. Support from mutual aid will likely be
needed.
• Based on the location of the accident, mass casualty and/or evacuation
procedures may be required.
Support Annex B. Evacuation
Purpose
The purpose of this annex is to provide an overview of local government responsibilities
with respect to in-place sheltering, evacuation, traffic control and security, during a
major disaster or emergency.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Sheriff
Municipal Law Enforcement
Federal Law Enforcement
9
13
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 8
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 8
A. Local Government.
The majority of evacuations or in-place sheltering takes place upon the direction of local
officials and without the involvement of state agencies. If local jurisdictions need
additional assistance or resources in order to carry out an evacuation, the Minnesota
Duty Officer (MDO) may be contacted to locate that assistance.
In the event of an escalating emergency outside city limits, the sheriff of the affected
county has the authority to recommend an evacuation or sheltering in place of
residents. Within city limits, the mayor has this authority. The county sheriff has the
authority to order a mandatory evacuation or sheltering in place, if the local government
has adopted specific ordinances addressing mandatory evacuation.
Incident Annex O. Transportation Incident
Policy
The National Transportation Safety Board Reauthorization Act of 2006, (Public Law
109-443)
Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, (Public Law 110-432)
Purpose
The Hennepin County Transportation Incident annex is a hazard-specific component of
the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan. It establishes the coordinated
response in the event of a multi-casualty transportation incident. Effective response
requires coordinated efforts of emergency medical personnel, law enforcement, fire
department personnel and may include state and federal agencies. With multiple
causalities, medical personnel and the hospital will serve as critical resources.
Scope
Transportation systems in or near Hennepin County include airways, roadways, and rail
systems. All these systems provide services on a national, regional, and local basis. A
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
• Municipal Transportation
Departments
• Metro Transit
• Metropolitan Airports
Commission
• Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MNDOT)
Hennepin County Transportation
Department
1, 8, 9
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 9
City of St. Louis Park ESF – 1
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Transportation & Evacuation
Page | 9
major accident is possible in any of these modes of transportation. The National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is charged by Congress with investigating every
civil aviation accident in the United States and significant accidents in other modes of
transportation – railroad, highway, marine and pipeline. Local and county
transportation departments as well as police, fire, EMS and public works also play
important roles in major accident responses.
Assumptions
• In the event of a major roadway incident, local municipalities will be
responsible for traffic control on roads within their jurisdiction.
• Outside of the affected area, unaffected transportation systems (land or rail)
should continue to function as designated, however, they should be prepared
to operate at maximum capacities during an incident or event.
• The volume of impact, area, duration, and resources needed, will determine
the level of response required.
• Travel routes will be monitored and closed at points at which travel would
become hazardous.
• Aircraft accidents, particularly commercial flights, are especially susceptible to
having mass casualties and fatalities.
• Demand for resources may be critical. Support from mutual aid will likely be
needed.
• Based on the location of the accident, mass casualty and/or evacuation
procedures may be required.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Police Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 10
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 1
City of Saint Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief
Primary Agencies: Hennepin County Emergency Communications Center
(Radio/Emergency)
Hennepin County Property Management (Landline)
City of Saint Louis Park (Landline)
Support Agencies: Hennepin County Information Services
Hennepin County Emergency Management & Homeland
Security
Municipal Information Technology Departments
National Weather Service (NWS)
Metropolitan Emergency Services Board (MESB)
Hennepin County Communications Services & Maintenance
(Radio Shop)
State Resources: Minnesota Office of Enterprise and Technology (MN.IT)
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF:
• Metro Region Technical Interoperable Communications Plan (TICP)
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex A. Situation Awareness, Indications,
Alert and Warning
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex O. Emergency Communications
• City of St. Louis Park ARMER Fleet Maps
• City of St. Louis Park Warning Siren Location Maps
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
Purpose
Emergency Support Function (ESF) #2 – Communications coordinates governmental
communications/warning/notification support to response efforts during incidents and
emergencies affecting City of St. Louis Park. ESF #2 – Communications also supports the
restoration of the communications infrastructure after an emergency, and facilitates the
coordination of plans to recover systems and applications.
ESF 2 Communications
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 11
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 2
ESF #2 – Communications also provides coordination between municipal, county, state,
and federal agencies before, during, and after incidents.
Responsibilities
The Hennepin County Sheriff Communications is the 24-hour city warning point. The
warning point is responsible for ensuring that all warnings and notifications which it
receives are handled properly.
A. Upon receipt of a warning, the warning point is responsible for notifying the key city
government officials and for notifying certain private and/or public facilities
(hospitals, industries, nursing homes, etc.)
B. The County emergency management director will advise the warning officer of
other actions to be taken.
C. The Hennepin County warning point shall activate all or selected warning devices.
LOCATION OF OUTDOOR WARNING SIRENS[LR1]
1. 26th & Natchez Avenue
2. 6910 West Lake Street
3. 8301 West 34th Street
4. 1642 Westwood Hills Drive
5. 26th Street and Dakota Avenue
6. 4850 West 36th Street
D. Hennepin County is responsible for activation of the Emergency Alert System
(EAS) in accordance with the Area Broadcast System Plan for a weather
emergency, hazardous materials emergency or other emergency.
E. The Police Duty Supervisor is responsible for ensuring that all warnings and
notifications received in the Public Safety Answering Point are handled properly.
Definitions:
WATCHES and ALERTS - These are given when conditions are present which
may produce an emergency condition. They may be either natural (weather)
or human (hazardous materials; terrorists, etc.)
WARNINGS - These are given when emergency conditions are imminent.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 12
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 3
F. Key facilities, institutions and major businesses within the city will receive
warnings through sirens, NOAA weather radio, the Emergency Broadcast System
and additional alerting procedures as needed.
G. Hearing impaired individuals will receive warnings by television crawlers and
closed captioning. Visually impaired individuals will receive warnings by sirens,
radio and television sound. Visual and hearing impaired individuals may rely on
companions for information. Among non-English speaking groups there are some
individuals, such as school children, who would understand and may convey the
warning. Televisions are also equipped with special features to allow non-English
speaking groups to receive information.
III. Operating Procedures for WEATHER WARNINGS
A. Weather Warnings received from the County warning system.
1. Activate Emergency Public Safety alert pagers.
2. The Dispatch Center shall notify the Police Duty Supervisor, the Fire Chief
or his designee (this means the Shift Duty Supervisor) and the Public
Works Superintendent of Operations.
3. The Police Duty Supervisor will notify the Police Chief and the City
Manager or their designee as appropriate.
4. As the situation dictates affected private and/or public facilities (schools,
industries, hospitals, nursing homes, etc.) will be notified. (see Resource
Manual)
B. Weather warnings generated within St. Louis Park
Tornado activity or sustained straight line winds in excess of 75 mph (hurricane
force) or potential for same.
1. Report weather conditions and observations to County warning point.
2. Request siren activation.
3. Activate emergency public safety personnel alert pagers.
4. The Dispatch Center shall notify the Police Duty Supervisor, the Fire Chief
or his designee (this means the Shift Duty Supervisor) and the Public
Works Superintendent of Operations.
5. The Police Duty Supervisor will notify the Police Chief, Fire Chief and the
City Manager as appropriate.
6. As the situation dictates affected private and/or public facilities (schools,
industries, hospitals, nursing homes, etc.) will be notified. (see Resource
Manual)
7. Names and numbers of key government officials to be notified are kept in
the Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) and are on file in the Emergency
Operations Center Resource file. Those key government officials being:
City Manager, Fire Chief and Police Chief or their designees, and Public
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 13
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 4
Works Director or designees.
C. Actions to be taken by Public Safety Personnel during weather WATCHES and
ALERTS include:
1. Report changes in weather conditions and observations to the Public Safety
Answering Point (PSAP) who will relay such observations to the County warning
point.
2. Communication Center Personnel shall monitor weather channel and
keep the Police Duty Supervisor apprised of current and forecasted conditions.
3. The Dispatch Center shall notify the Police Duty Supervisor, the Fire Chief or their
designee (this means the Shift Duty Supervisor) and the Public Works
Superintendent of Operations.
4. The Police Duty Supervisor will notify the Police Chief and the City Manager as
appropriate.
5. If requested by the Fire Chief or his designee, page Fire Department
personnel to report to respective stations.
IV. Hazardous Materials warning generated within St. Louis Park.
A. Assure that Fire Department has been notified and obtain Response Level
Description from responding fire units.
B. If mass evacuation is necessary from an area potentially affected or at risk:
1. Obtain accurate description of area to be evacuated. If appropriate, the
evacuation routes.
2. Report conditions to County warning point and request Emergency
Alert System (E.A.S.) and siren activation for affected area.
3. Activate Emergency Public Safety alert pagers where necessary.
4. Notify personnel on Hazardous Materials Notification List. (See
Attachment 9)
5. As the situation dictates affected private and/or public facilities
(schools, industries, hospitals, nursing homes, etc.) will be notified.
6. Complete SARA Title III Emergency Notification Report. (See Attachment 8)
C. Hazardous materials facilities in St. Louis Park are required to have an
on-site facility plan which identifies the procedure for public safety
notification. This notification is generally through the 911 system.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 14
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 5
V. All Other Emergencies:
1. These would be extraordinary events not routinely handled by Public
Safety on-duty personnel.
2. Dispatch will contact the appropriate responsible official who will
advise actions to be taken.
3. Succession of responsibility is Police Supervisor on duty, Fire
Supervisor on duty, Emergency Management Director
Scope
ESF #2 – Communications coordinates county actions to assist municipal governments
and industry in restoring the public communications infrastructure and the public safety
communications infrastructure.
ESF #2 provides communications support at incident scenes, at the Hennepin County
Emergency Operations Center (HCEOC) and municipal EOCs; at Departmental
Operations Centers (DOCs); and at Joint Information Centers (JIC). ESF #2 coordinates
special situations such as major events, and will assist county and municipal Information
Technology agencies in response to cyber incidents as directed.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex A. Situation Awareness, Indications, Alert and Warning
Purpose
Hennepin County Emergency Management takes an active role in providing a means of
receipt and dissemination to warn Hennepin County of potential emergency situations.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Sheriff ’s
Communication
Division
Emergency Management 2, 13
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 15
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 6
Scope
Hennepin County maintains equipment and personnel to allow for rapid activation of
community sirens within the county. These sirens and their associated equipment are
purchased and maintained by the political subdivisions within the county. Activation is
based upon the information that one or more of these criteria have been met:
Hennepin County Siren Activation Criteria
• Tornadic activity or potential
• Sustained straight line winds in excess of 70 mph or potential for the same
• Mass evacuation is necessary for an area whose outer boundaries extend at
least 2500 feet from the point of incident
• Imminent or actual hostile enemy attack as reported by Federal or State
authorities, or
• Tests and maintenance operations
The final decision on siren activation is made by the County Warning Officer (CW O) at the
County Warning Point (CWP).
Additionally, Hennepin County maintains equipment and personnel to notify emergency
response organizations in the county of actual or potential emergency situations.
The CWP notifies local fire departments of emergency calls via pager system. Each
jurisdiction is responsible for its own fire protection. The county does not have a fire
department.
Functional Annex O. Emergency Communications
Policy
This annex establishes the complexities of the communication format in which HCEM
uses through various platforms, guidelines for receiving and sending data, and Web base
interactions. Information and messaging is intended to increase situational awareness
and knowledge in the event of a significant event.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Sheriff’s
Communications Office
Hennepin County Emergency
Management
2
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 16
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 7
Various organizations and partners contribute to the use and dissemination of
information.
• Statewide Emergency Communications Board ARMER Standards
• Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office Standard Operating Procedures
• Hennepin County Emergency Management Communications Policies
• Hennepin County Emergency Management Communications Manual
• Hennepin County Emergency Management Auxiliary Communications Team
Critical Tasks and Responsibility of Functions
Purpose
This annex outlines Hennepin County’s capability to receive and transmit priority
communications traffic during imminent or actual emergency events that necessitate
expanded coordination of communications systems. During such events, this annex will
provide management, oversight, and coordination of communications functions
among First Responders, Hennepin County and independent Dispatch Centers,
the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Center and other city Emergency
Operations Centers, County Departments, and the general public.
Scope
This annex will coordinate the establishment, maintenance, and restoration of
communications systems to ensure the provision of efficient communications during
emergency operations. This function will enable the receipt and transmission of priority
messages by coordinating emergency systems used to communicate with and among
various response departments and emergency systems used to communicate disaster
information to the general public. This annex applies to all departments that may require
communications services, or whose communications systems may be affected during
emergency operations centers.
Assumptions
• A natural or manmade disaster may severely damage the communications
infrastructure in the impacted area;
• Even if no infrastructure damage occurs, the nature of disasters will quickly
overwhelm the capacity of the regular communications systems in place;
• Damage to communications equipment may influence the means and accessibility
level for relief services and supplies;
• Initial damage reports may be fragmented and provide an incomplete picture
concerning the extent of damage to telecommunications facilities;
• Weather and other environmental factors may restrict the ability of suppliers to
deploy mobile or transportable telecommunications equipment into the affected
area;
• Communications assistance will be provided according to the requirements of this
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 17
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 8
plan and the Minnesota Metro Region Tactical Interoperable Communications
Plan (TICP).
Authentication
City of St. Louis City Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Police Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City of St. Louis Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 18
City of Saint Louis Park ESF - 2
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Warning & Notification
Page I 9
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 19
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 3
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PL AN Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
Page | 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Director of Operations & Recreation City of St. Louis Park Director of Engineering
Primary Agency: City of St. Louis Park Public Works
Support Agencies: Hennepin County Municipal Public Works
Hennepin County Municipal Parks & Recreation
Hennepin County Public Works
Private Sector Companies Servicing Hennepin County
Hennepin County Emergency Management
State Resources: Minnesota State Patrol
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minnesota Department of Transportation
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency
Management
Minnesota National Guard
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
MN VOAD
Federal Resources: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Department of Homeland Security/FEMA
References
Contingency Operational Plans are on file in the Municipal Service Center offices
of the Public Works Division and the City’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC).
The plans include the following:
• Standard Operating Procedure for Debris & Tree Removal and Disposal
• Standard Operating Procedure for Roadway Restoration
• Standard Operating Procedure for Temporary Traffic Control
• Standard Operating Procedure for Equipment Procurement (during
emergencies)
• Standard Operating Procedure for Traffic Signal System
• City of St. Louis Park Engineering SOPs
• Functional Annex K. Debris Management
ESF 3 – Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 20
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 3
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PL AN Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
Page | 2
The following are a list of supporting/reference documents for this ESF on file in
the Municipal Service Center offices of the Public Works DivisionCity Hall offices
of the Department of Public Works and the City’s Emergency Operations Center
(EOC). The documents include the following:
• A chain of command for Director of Operations & RecreationPublic
Works
• A callout list for Public Works employees and Parks Maintenance
employees including the emergency equipment that each employee
is trained to operate
• A list of Agencies and City’s contractors/vendors capable of
supplying operation services and equipment
• A list of governmental units participating in the Regional Mutual Aid
Association (no formal agreements for debris removal or roadway
restoration exist with other cities other than through normal
emergency preparedness channels
• The appropriate section of the A letter of agreement with Waste
Management contract for emergency debris removal
• Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
o Hennepin County Functional Annex K – Debris Management
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• 29 C.F.R. 1910-1926: OSHA standards
• Federal Regulations
Purpose
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) provides guidance for public works and
provide an overview of how debris (all types, including trees) clearance/disposal
and roadway restoration services would be accomplished following a disaster.
Scope
ESF #3 is structured to provide publics works and engineering related support for
the changing requirements of incident management to include preparedness,
prevention, response, recovery, and mitigation actions. Activities within the
scope of this function are divided between the Department of Operations &
Recreation and Department of Engineering to include:
Director of Operations Public Works
Superintendent
First 24-72 hrs
Director of Engineering – Long Term
Conducting pre and post incident
assessments of Operations (roads,
storm sewer, and equipment);
Quick fix
Conducting pre and post incident
assessments of Engineering (bridges,
roads, and equipment); Longer
duration, bigger project
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 21
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 3
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PL AN Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
Page | 3
Coordinating primary and emergency
route clearance for life safety and
infrastructure support activities
Executing emergency contract support
for life-saving and sustaining services
Executing emergency contract support
for life-saving and sustaining services
Conducting overall damage
assessment to City-owned structures
affected by disaster
Providing emergency repair of
damaged infrastructure and critical
facilities
Providing technical assistance to
include engineering expertise,
construction management, and
contracting
Providing operational assistance to
include practical expertise, construction
management, and contracting
Providing emergency repair of
damaged infrastructure and critical
facilities
Providing for debris removal, temporary
storage, and final disposal
1. Providing emergency repair of damaged infrastructure and critical
facilities;
The Director of Operations Public Works Superintendent or designee and the
Emergency Operations Center will coordinate the following City staff and private
sector organizations, which are responsible for providing debris and roadway
restoration services for the City of St. Louis Park:
• Debris Clearance – Superintendent of Operations Operations Manager
and/or the Operations Supervisors/Park Maintenance Superintendent
and/or City contracted Solid Waste Hauler
• Debris Disposal – Superintendent of Operations Operations Manager and
Parks Maintenance Superintendent and/or City contracted Solid Waste
Hauler
• Street Restoration – Superintendent of Operations Operations Manager
Policies
A. Debris clearance, disposal, roadway restoration and temporary traffic
control will be prioritized and directed through the Director of
OperationsPublic Works Superintendent or Designee and the Emergency
Operations Center to ensure coordination with other emergency efforts to
maintain roadway mobility and maximum public safety.
B. Except in extremely unusual circumstances, debris clearance from private
property would be the responsibility of the of the property owner, unless
otherwise directed by City Council.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 22
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 3
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PL AN Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
Page | 4
C. Residents may be asked to sort debris by:
• Trees & brush
• White goods (appliances)
• Hazardous waste
• Construction/demolition materials
• Regular garbage
• Recycling
D. Debris can be temporarily stored at the following locations:
• City owned facilities:
o Municipal Service Center (7305 Oxford Street)
o Transfer Site (Cedar Lake Road & Colorado Avenue)
o Louisiana Oaks Park (3500 Louisiana Avenue South)
o Park Glen Tower Site (City Water Tower Site)
• Other sites as designated by the Director of Operations and
Recreation, or the Parks Maintenance Superintendent, or the
Environmental Coordinator.
E. Debris would be disposed of at the following locations:
• Solid waste debris (non-hazardous materials) would be placed in
an appropriate transfer site, fill site, or would be trucked to other
designated locations as per Superintendents, Hennepin County, or
solid waste hauler;
• Tree debris would be chipped or hauled and disposed of in
locations determined by the Environmental Coordinator working
with the Director of Operations Public Works Superintendent or
Operations Manager and Parks Maintenance Superintendents.
working with the Environmental Coordinator;
• Animal carcasses will be disposed of as determined by the Director
of OperationsPublic Works SuperintendentOperations Manager,
working with the City Environmental Coordinator and Police
Department;
• For all hazardous material disposal refer to ESF 10 Hazardous &
Radiological Materials
F. If additional assistance is needed, the Director of Operations Public Works
Superintendent or the designee and the Emergency Operations Center
will coordinate MNWARN identified in the Emergency Operations
resource manual.
G. Coordinate emergency affecting the Minnehaha Creek Watershed is
available from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 23
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 3
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PL AN Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
Page | 5
H. Director of Engineering and the Engineering Office will:
Maintain Flood Plain Plan
• Conduct infrastructure damage assessments
• Utilizing damage assessments create project sheets (utilize FEMA
format) for each site that requires repair and or mitigation
• Prioritize repair and mitigation projects
• Coordinate projects and ensure project completion
• Provide appropriate documentation as needed for reimbursement
purposes
• Manage long term recovery efforts
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under
please reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex K. Debris Management
PURPOSE
The purpose of this annex is to indicate which agencies are responsible for the
various aspects of debris clearance and management including, the
management of contaminated debris and the minimization of health effects
arising from the handling and disposition of these materials.
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
Private sector organizations may be able to provide essential debris clearance
assistance, depending on the nature, location and extent of the disaster.
Assistance in contacting such organizations can be obtained by contacting the
Minnesota Duty Officer (MDO). If a responsible party can be identified, relative to
debris/wreckage, that party will normally be expected to remove it. When there is
no responsible party (following a flood, tornado, etc.) or a responsible party
cannot be identified:
1. Debris/wreckage clearance on county and/or municipal government property
will normally be the responsibility of local government officials.
2. Debris/wreckage clearance on privately owned property would normally be the
responsibility of the property owner.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 24
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 3
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PL AN Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
Page | 6
Records of labor and equipment expenses incurred as a result of
debris/wreckage clearance will be maintained as accurately and thoroughly as
possible by each responsible agency/organization participating in the cleanup
activity. (Such records are needed when requesting reimbursement for expenses
related to debris management.)
Concept of Operation
1. Debris Management
Debris Management is the collection, sorting, storage, transportation, and
disposal or recycling of rubble, destroyed materials, and other wastes associated
with an event.
a. Organization
Debris management operations are coordinated and completed at the
local level by the affected municipality. Hennepin County Public Works
will provide additional debris clearance resources as requested.
b. Responsibilities
i. Municipalities (Debris Removal)
• Will clear debris from city streets, city public right-of-ways and
city facilities;
• Will coordinate with Hennepin County Public Works and the
Minnesota Department of Transportation regarding County
roads, State Highways, and Interstates involving debris
clearance;
• Will coordinate and oversee mutual aid requests and
responding resources;
• Will coordinate efforts with the Parks Department in the debris
clearance of parks and park trail properties;
• Are responsible for the disposal of public waste (concrete, dirt,
brick, non-hazardous materials, etc.) tree and brush-type debris
and other building-type debris (lumber, roofing materials).
• Will obtain debris clearance-type equipment from Hennepin
County and other cities per Hennepin County equipment
listings and from contractors available to the municipality having
jurisdiction;
• Will provide barricades and signage for street closures and
detours requested by the Incident Commander.
• Priorities of utility restoration/repair will depend on the nature
and location of the incident. Vulnerable populations and facilities
essential for public safety will be considered first.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 25
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 3
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PL AN Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
Page | 7
ii. Municipalities (Debris Disposal)
• Debris will be disposed of at a landfill or designated location per
Hennepin County;
• Tree debris will be brought to a site as designated by public
works for the municipality having authority.
iii. Municipalities (Private Property)
• Except for extremely unusual circumstances, removal of debris
from private property would be the responsibility of the property
owner.
• Residents will be asked to sort debris by:
a. Trees and brush
b. White goods
c. Household hazardous waste
d. construction/demolition materials
e. Regular garbage
iv. Municipalities (Sanitation)
• Each municipality has identified the residential and commercial
sanitation services that will provide temporary water and waste
systems during an emergency.
v. Hennepin County Transportation (Debris Removal)
• Coordinate with the Environmental Services Department on
debris management/removal operations from county rights-of-
way;
• Determine emergency routes and contracting procedures for
county level debris removal;
• Identify possible locations for temporary storage and final
disposition of debris on a county level.
• Maintain a list of all public and private utilities providing services
to Hennepin County. This list and 24-hour emergency
telephone information is located in the Watch Leader Resource
Manual.
Vi. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
• Will assist with the disposal of hazardous waste.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 26
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 3
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PL AN Debris Removal & Roadway Restoration
Page | 8
vii. Board of Animal Health
In conjunction with the Minnesota Department of Agriculture, advise and assist
on the disposal of animal carcasses and advise on potential health issues such
as mosquito/fly infestations.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Director, Operations & Recreation Date
City of St. Louis Park Director, Engineering Date
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 27
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Firefighting
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief
Primary Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Fire Department
Support Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Operations
City of St. Louis Park Police Department
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Hennepin County Sheriff Communications
Hennepin County Radio Shop
City of St. Louis Park Dispatch
Hennepin County Emergency Medical Services
Hennepin County Public Works
Hennepin County Chiefs Association Mutual Aid
State Resources: Minnesota State Patrol
Minnesota State Duty Officer
Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emergency
Management
Minnesota National Guard
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Department of Forestry
Statewide Fire Mutual Aid
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• St. Louis Park Fire Department Standard Operating Guidelines
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan - Functional Annex H. Fire
and Hazardous Materials
• Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan - Incident Annex M. Fire,
Woodland
• Metro Region EMS Incident Response Plan
• Minnesota State Fire Chiefs Association Fire Service Intrastate Mutual Aid
• Minnesota Statute Chapter 12
• Federal Regulations
ESF 4 Firefighting
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 28
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Firefighting
Page I 2
• Hennepin County Fire Chiefs Mutual Aid
• National Pipeline Mapping System https://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov
• 2013 CAER Pipeline Emergency Response Plan
• 49 CFR 192.605 - Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and
emergencies.
• 49 CFR 192.615 - Emergency plans.
• 49 CFR 195.402 - Procedural manual for operations, maintenance, and
emergencies.
Purpose
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) is developed for the effective response of
suppression of urban, rural, wild land fire, rescue, and EMS which require a fire
service response.
Scope
Fire protection in St. Louis Park is provided by the St. Louis Park Fire Department. This
is a combination department which has approximately 24 full time and 25 paid-on-call
members. Activities within the scope of this ESF include the coordination of:
• Fire suppression
• Responding to medical emergencies and car accidents
• Search and rescue
• Water Rescue
• Hazardous materials calls and the overseeing clean-up of hazardous material
spills (Refer to Hazardous Materials and Radiological Monitoring ESF)
• Providing disaster recovery services
• Preventing fires by inspecting
o Multi-Family Residential
o Commercial
o Manufacturing
o Public Events that meet criteria
• Enforcing fire code compliance
• Investigating causes of fires
and providing personnel, equipment, and supplies in support of local jurisdictions
involved in these operations.
• Established City of St. Louis Park Fire Department Box Alarms
• Hennepin County Chiefs Mutual Aid
• MN Fire Chiefs Statewide Mutual Aid
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 29
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Firefighting
Page I 3
ESF #4 serves as the coordination ESF for the use of fire service resources in the City
of St. Louis Park during times of large scale emergency, events and disaster.
Assumptions
1.Coordinate all Fire and Rescue personnel to help control the orderly movement of those
displaced.
2.Set up surveillance teams for fire watch to cover the community during and after the
community has been evacuated. Coordinate with the Chief of Police for needed security.
3.Survey and coordinate the fire needs and move personnel and equipment for standby
assistance.
4.Provide inspection teams for fire prevention measures in all buildings and congregate care
facilities.
5.Perform frequent fire safety inspections for fire hazards in congregate care facilities, other
occupied areas due to relocation, and areas of flammable materials storage.
6. Establish, publish and enforce temporary fire safety regulations for congregate care
facilities, particularly in regard to smoking, cooking and heating.
7.Assist in training residents and others in fire prevention and suppression techniques.
8.Assist in the return of those displaced to their homes.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex H. Fire and Hazardous Materials
Purpose
It is recognized that emergency situations could develop in which residents of Hennepin
County could be exposed to an accidental release of hazardous materials. Planning is
needed to ensure a coordinated response to all types of hazardous materials, incidents,
whether they occur at a fixed facility or are the result of a transportation accident.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County Municipalities Environmental Services 4, 10
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 30
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Firefighting
Page I 4
Scope
Hennepin County municipalities are charged with protection of life and property as the
result of a hazardous materials incident.
Control
A. Hazardous material operations will be conducted on-scene, whether they occur at a
fixed facility or are the result of a transportation accident. The Incident Command
System (ICS) shall be used as the general response for hazardous material
incidents within Hennepin County.
B. The local Emergency Operations Center shall serve as an alternate Incident
Commander, in determining and deciding the need for actual or precautionary
evacuation, or for shelter-in-place and for re-entry (re-population).
Responsibilities
A. Municipalities
1. On-scene disaster analysis
2. Information gathering and reporting to the County, as appropriate.
3. Overall hazardous materials response and clean-up operations, including
monitoring, reporting, assessment, containment, decontamination, and
protective actions.
4. Maintaining a list of Title III 302 facilities, maps of chemical manufacturing/
storage/processing sites and transportation routes, including road, rail, air,
and pipeline are contained within each planning groups emergency plans.
Primary and secondary routes to be used for the transportation of
substances on the list of extremely hazardous substances are included in
the Planning Group Emergency Operations Plans.
The main transportation routes are:
a) Interstate 94W
b) Interstate 494 North or South
c) Interstate 35W North or South
d) State Highway 100 North or South
e) State Highway 12 (394) West or East
f) State Highway 169 North or South
g) City or County roads to the major transportation highways as directed
5. Provide direction to CMED in its emergency support role of coordinating the
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 31
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Firefighting
Page I 5
establishment and operation of a mobile equipment pool.
6. Each local jurisdiction has on file the Credentials and Certifications to which
the police, fire and emer gency medical service (EMS) providers are trained
to deal with hazardous materials, as well as the training records. The
Incident Command System (ICS) de-scribed in the National Incident
Management System (NIMS) shall be used as the general response for
hazardous material incidents within Hennepin County. The chief officers of
the designated response agencies have been trained in NIMS/ICS
operations, and maintain at their main offices copies of their agency’s
Operating Procedures.
7. Each local jurisdiction has identified the methods they will use to determine
that a release has occurred.
.
8. Each local jurisdiction has identified methods for determining the area or
populations likely to be affected by such a release. Municipal first
responders begin their determination of the area and populations affected
by a hazardous materials release in the following manner:
a) Identifying the substance(s) released, based on information from
facility personnel, placards, labels and/or facility emergency response
plan data;
b) Identifying the approximate amount of hazardous substance(s)
released;
c) Identifying hazards created by the release;
d) Identifying impacts of the release on the surrounding community;
e) Identifying meteorological and other local conditions;
f) Considering time factors;
g) Consulting detailed local maps.
h) Advice of facility personnel
i) Advice from Chemical Assessment Teams
Software such as; ALOHA, E-PLAN, CAMEO, etc. is available to assist in
developing this item, as well as the published Department of Transportation
Emergency Response Guidebook.
9. The individual Planning Groups Resource Manuals have lists of both
publicly and privately owned equipment suitable for use during a hazardous.
These lists of resources also identify the locations of the resources, the
individuals responsible for release of the resources and their 24-hour
contact information. In the case of equipment and facilities maintained by
the individual municipal departments, the department head is responsible
for its release and use. The Hennepin County Emergency Management
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 32
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Firefighting
Page I 6
Division also contains Municipal Planning Group Resource Manuals on file
in the Division library.
10. The appropriate municipal fire department is responsible for fire protection,
initial response, containment and decontamination. Specific capabilities are
located in the regional planning group emergency plans.
Incident Annex M. Fire, Woodland
Policy
• National Weather Service Directive NWSI 10-401.
• Local mutual aid agreements
Purpose
The purpose of this Incident Annex is to provide a framework for the implementation and
coordination of woodland fire response activities which focus on reducing the impacts of
woodland fires across Hennepin County. The plan’s main objective is to identify agencies
that can provide reliable resources to those most at risk of woodland fire. More rural
Hennepin County municipalities are at risk for woodland fires.
Scope
The Minnesota woodland fire season varies but usually begins as early as mid-March and
generally ends in November. Due to areas of flammable brush, portions of the County
have experience woodland fires in the past. High temperature, low humidity, and high
winds increase the potential for woodland fires.
Assumptions
• Mitigation efforts such as vegetation management and prescribed burn plans will
lessen the risk of woodland fire in the county
• Residences will self-evacuate during woodland fire events
• The geographic extent of woodland fire is unpredictable
• Firefighting professionals are trained/ certified in fighting woodland fires.
.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Municipal Fire
Departments
National Weather Service Chanhassen
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
4
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 33
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Firefighting
Page I 7
Concept of Operations
The National Weather Service's issuance of a Fire Weather Watch or Red Flag Warning
may initiate a series of responses from municipal, county, and State agencies that have
a role in woodland fire management and coordination.
During a woodland fire, Hennepin County municipalities will establish Incident Command
for command and control and fire suppression. Mutual aid agreements as well as
assistance from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources may be activated during
these situations.
Organization
A. Incident Management
During a woodland fire, the Incident Commander will establish the initial
command and control functions based on the Incident Command System.
Most woodland fires will be operationally controlled on-scene. It will be the
call of the Incident Commander to activate a local Emergency Operations
Center when deemed necessary for the coordination of resources.
Assignment of Responsibilities
A. National Weather Service (NWS)
1. Issue Fire Weather Watches and Red Flag Warnings when the
combination of dry fuels and weather conditions support extreme fire
danger and/or fire behavior
2. Conduct county-wide phone conferences during extreme cold outbreaks
as needed
B. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
1. Keep the NWS aware of fuel conditions which could lead to extreme fire
danger
2. Issue updated fire danger rating maps as well as current burning permit
restrictions
3. Control and extinguish wildfires
4. Coordinate prescribed burns
C. Municipal Fire Departments
1. Control and extinguish wildfires.
D. Hennepin County Emergency Management
1. Maintains situational awareness of woodland fires that have the
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 34
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 4
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Firefighting
Page I 8
potential to impact Hennepin County and its adjacent area of
operations.
2. Disseminate Fire Weather Watches & Red Flag Warning products to
the emergency management community and county leadership.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park City Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 35
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: St. Louis Park Emergency Management Director
Primary Agencies: St. Louis Park Fire Department
St. Louis Park City Departments
St. Louis Park Information Resources
St. Louis Park Legal
Support Agencies: Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office
St. Louis Park City Departments
Hennepin County GIS
MN VOAD
State Resources: Minnesota State Duty Officer
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
Minnesota National Guard
Federal Resources: Department of Homeland Security and Emergency
Management/Federal Emergency Management Agency
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• City of St. Louis Park Departments Standard Operating Procedures
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex B. Emergency Management
• Minnesota State Statutes Chapter 12
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
Purpose
ESF #5 – Emergency Management is responsible for supporting overall activities of the
local municipal government for incident management. ESF #5 provides the core
management and administrative functions in support of the chief elected and appointed
officials; the on-scene incident commanders; the City Incident Managers; and the
Emergency Operations Center. The City of St. Louis Park has requirements in this realm.
ESF 5 Direction & Control
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 36
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 2
The City of St. Louis Park has established ESF #5 to provide the core management and
administrative functions in support of preparedness, response, recovery and mitigation
efforts at the overall city level.
ESF #5 is responsible for emergency and disaster support and planning functions. ESF
#5 activities include those functions that are critical to support and facilitate multiagency
planning and coordination for operations involving incidents requiring actions by multiple
departments or jurisdictions.
This includes alert and notification; staffing and deployment of response teams, as well as
facilitating the requests for and operations of response teams from other departments and
agencies; incident action planning; coordination of operations; logistics management;
direction and control; information collection, analysis, and management; facilitation of
requests for County, State and Federal assistance; resource acquisition and
management; worker safety and health; facilities management; financial management;
and other support as required.
Scope
Emergency Support Function #5 focuses on the emergency management activities that
support emergency operations throughout the City of St. Louis Park. It also outlines the
coordination responsibilities of emergency management during emergencies and
disasters that require county involvement or have a county wide impact. This ESF may
rely on the use of mutual aid for large scale disaster.
During the post-incident response phase, ESF #5 is responsible for the support and
planning functions. ESF #5 activities include those functions that are critical to support
and facilitate multiagency planning and coordination for operations involving incidents
requiring governmental coordination. This includes alert and notification; staffing and
deployment of emergency response teams, as well as coordinating response teams from
other county departments and agencies; incident action planning; coordination of
operations; logistics management; direction and control; information collection, analysis,
and management; facilitation of requests for County, State and Federal assistance;
resource acquisition and management; and other support as required.
ESF #5 serves as the coordination ESF for all City of St. Louis Park departments and
agencies across the spectrum of incident management from pre-emergency planning, to
hazard mitigation and preparedness to response and recovery. ESF #5 will identify
resources for alert, activation, and subsequent deployment for quick and effective
response, and will coordinate response and recovery activities between individual scenes
of action and City elected officials, senior management and policy makers.
County/Jurisdiction Interface: As the ESF #5 coordinating entity, HCEM will develop,
implement, and maintain the All Hazard Emergency Operations Plan and the Countywide
All Hazard Mitigation Plan. HCEM will coordinate the integration of county departmental
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 37
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 3
emergency procedures, and will support (when requested) jurisdictional department
emergency procedures with these plans and each other to assure unity of purpose.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Responsibilities
The City of St. Louis Park City Manager/Emergency Manager will be responsible for
overall direction and control of city government resources involved in the response to a
disaster. The line of succession to the Emergency Manager is:
City Manager/Emergency Manager
Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator
Police Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator
The Emergency Management Coordinators will serve in a staff capacity to the City
Manager, and will implement and coordinate all aspects of this plan.
The Mayor and City Council are responsible for:
• A Declaration of Emergency
• Policy Issues
• Financial decisions over approved amounts
City of Saint Louis Park Emergency Operations Center (EOC)
Direction and Control of St. Louis Park’s response to a disaster will be carried out at the
St. Louis Park EOC.
The primary EOC is located at the St. Louis Park Police Department – 3015 Raleigh Ave.
South.
If for some reason the EOC is not usable at the time of a disaster, the St. Louis Park Fire
Department Station 1 – 3750 Wooddale Avenue will serve as the alternate EOC or as
designated. The primary and alternate EOC can be fully operational in two hours.
Criteria for EOC Activation
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 38
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 4
The degree of St. Louis Park EOC activation will be determined by the severity of the
emergency.
A. The EOC may be partially activated due to a potential threat to life or property
from severe weather, I.e. tornado, flooding, blizzard, or hazardous materials
incident or accident that is a controlled release of a reportable product (Response
Level 1)
B. The EOC would be fully activated in response to any and all hazards resulting
in a threat to life and property longer than an operational period.
Responsibility for EOC Activation
In the event of a major disaster, EOC staff would be expected to automatically report to
the EOC. However, the St. Louis Park Emergency Management Coordinator is
responsible for ensuring that the EOC is activated according to the criteria discussed
above.
Staffing of the EOC
The staffing list for the St. Louis Park EOC is on file with the Emergency Management
Coordinator. Each department/agency which is represented in the EOC is responsible for
ensuring that its representative is familiar with duties which he/she is expected to perform
at the EOC.
At anytime the City Emergency Management Coordinator may request All Hazard
Incident Management Team Support for Incident or EOC Support. These teams can be
utilized to assist in fulfilling operational period (12 to 24 hour) needs.
The following chart indicates the level of training that is maintained for those that would
be involved in an Incident, Planned event or EOC activation.
100 200 700 800 300 400 402 EOC
Set-up
Annual Update
Activation
Elected
Officials
X X
Department
Staff
X X X X Department
Heads X
Command
Staff
X X X X X X X X
Responders X X X X Fire /
PD / IT
Other (CERT) X X X X Leaders? X Leadership
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 39
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 5
EOC Equipment/Supplies
The St. Louis Park Emergency Management Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that
the EOC is operational and that the necessary maps, displays, tables, chairs,
communication equipment, message logs, etc. are on hand and available for use in the
EOC.
Communications Capability
The St. Louis Park Emergency Management Coordinator has been given the
responsibility of ensuring all communications systems primary and secondary are
operational and communication links between response personnel and EOC operations
are identified.
Communication links are established between the Saint Louis Park EOC and the
following organizations:
1. Other municipalities within the county and adjacent counties
2. Hennepin County EOC and State EOC
3. City Departments
4. All City of Saint Louis Park responders and Hennepin County responders
5. Hospital
6. Amateur radio communications networks
7. MNVOADS
EOC Capabilities
1. Both EOCs have an emergency (back-up) power source which is capable of
supplying back-up power to the entire building.
2. Both EOCs is connected to the water system
3. Both EOCs ventilation is monitored by a sensor that regulates fresh air into the
EOC when needed
4. Both EOCs are equipped with restroom and shower facilities which are connected
to the city sanitation system
5. Both EOCs have a fully equipped kitchen
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Management
Preparedness • Review the ESF-5 Annex annually and update as needed
• Continually evaluate the capabilities required to accomplish the
ESF-5 mission, identify any gaps, and leverage resources to
address them
• Manage the resolution of ESF-5 after-action issues
• Develop and/or participate in relevant ESF related planning,
training, and exercise activities at the local, regional, state, and/or
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 40
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 6
federal level
• Ensure necessary supplements to the ESF are developed and
maintained (including emergency contact lists, resource lists,
departmental/functional plans, procedures, protocols, & EOC
check lists)
• Ensure representatives from the Coordinating Agency and
Support Agencies are fully trained and prepared to respond to the
County EOC
• Ensure each of the preparedness responsibilities identified for
ESF-5 are accomplished
• Maintain an inventory of agency resources
• Maintain emergency contact information
Response • Establish and maintain operational awareness of emergency
management through direct communications links with
operational units (both private and public) in the field and/or their
appropriate coordinating entities;
• Conduct emergency management disaster impact and needs
assessments, prioritize ESF-5 operational objectives in alignment
with the EOC Action Plan, and coordinate ESF-5 city-wide
response activities;
• Collect and analyze information relevant to ESF-5 and report in
Common Operating System and EOC documents including EOC
Action Plans and Situational Reports;
• Receive, manage, & track resource requests for ESF-5;
• Ensure full coordination of activities with other groups within the
EOC to assist in the development and maintenance of a common
operating picture.
• Provide emergency management support in emergency/disasters,
in accordance with departmental operations guides & protocols,
existing MOUs & agreements, and the ESF-5.
• Coordinate response activities with the City EOC in support of the
ESF-5 mission
• Ensure responsibilities identified in ESF-5 are accomplished
regardless of the activation/staffing level of the City EOC
• Arrange for appropriate staffing for ESF-5 in the EOC throughout
activations
• Coordinate the ESF-5 activities with the County EOC
Recovery • Coordinate the ESF-5 support of recovery activities
• Coordinate the restoration of ESF-5 resources and/or capabilities
as needed
• Ensure ESF-5 EOC and/or participating agencies provide
appropriate records of costs incurred
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 41
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 7
• Conduct an ESF-5 after action review
Mitigation • Identify and implement mitigation activities to prevent or lessen
the impact of future incidents
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex B. Emergency Management
National incident Management System (NIMS)
Board, Resolution 05-6-267 established the National Incident Management System
(NIMS) as the standard for incident management within Hennepin County.
Policy
The standards and practices of NIMS will be the primary emergency management
concept. It is the policy of Hennepin County and each municipality to establish overall
direction, control and coordination through an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to
support the community response to a disaster.
Each participating jurisdiction designates primary and alternate locations from which to
establish direction and control at the Incident Command Post (ICP) during a disaster. The
EOC shall be kept informed of current status and needs.
It is the policy of HCEM to use City Watch, WebEOC, social media, IPAWS, and other
existing systems, such as telephone, telephone facsimiles, county radio frequencies, law
enforcement teletype, and amateur radio for the dissemination of warning information.
The Emergency Alerting System (EAS) may also be used.
It is the policy of HCEM to endeavor to release timely and accurate emergency
information to the public concerning emergency preparedness, response and recovery in
a cooperative manner with the media. This will be coordinated with Incident
Commanders, other jurisdictions and the State Emergency Operations Center (SEOC).
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
County Administration Emergency Management 5
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 42
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 8
All such releases will be under the control of the EOC with all participating jurisdictions
coordinating fact-based emergency public information for dissemination.
Direction & Control
The Director of Emergency Management (DEM) and the staff of the HCEM will assist in
coordination of emergency operations and be the contact point for the Division of
Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEM), the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The
DEM will be staff advisor to the County Administrator. The County Administrator may
convene an Emergency Team to assess the situation and the actions taken thus far, and
to determine a plan of action.
Board Resolution 02-2-48R1 details the emergency administrative line of succession.
Responsibility for direction and control for disaster response and recovery rests with the
County Administrator. The line of succession is:
County Administrator
Deputy County Administrator
Assistant County Administrator, Public Works
Assistant County Administrator, Human Services
Transportation Department Director
Community Health Department Director
Children, Family & Adult Services Department Director
Community Corrections Department Director
Purpose
To provide for the effective overall direction, control, and coordination of emergency
management activities undertaken in accordance with the Hennepin County Emergency
Operations Plan and to provide guidance for the dissemination of warning information.
Emergency operations include coordination of resources to save lives, protect property
and provide for the continuity of government. Operations may also include liaison and
coordination with local, state, and federal jurisdictions as well as other public and private
agencies and organizations.
Scope
The provisions of this section encompass activation of all or part of the Hennepin County
EOP for emergencies and disasters in the County or in any of the participating
jurisdictions.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 43
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 5
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Direction & Control
Page I 9
Recognition and the use of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) at all levels
provides for the expansion of the emergency management system to meet the specific
needs of the incident, regardless of the nature and scope.
Functions covered by this portion of the plan are:
A. Incident Command (Unified Command)
B. Liaison
C. Emergency Public Information and Warning
D. Incident personnel safety
Assumptions
• When an emergency/disaster occurs or threatens to occur, the EOC will be
activated in a timely manner.
• If a total evacuation becomes necessary, operations can be successfully controlled
from nearby safe locations.
• Close coordination must be maintained between the EOC and the disaster scene
to identify special considerations, secondary threats, and available resources.
• Most emergency situations are handled routinely by emergency response
personnel and can be managed at the field level under established departmental
procedures.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of Saint Louis Park Police Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City of Saint Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 44
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 6
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Mass Care, Housing & Human Services
1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Recreation Center Manager
Primary Agencies: American Red Cross Twin Cities
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Hennepin County Public Health & Human Services
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Management
City of St. Louis Park Recreation
Support Agencies: City of St. Louis Park City Departments
City of St. Louis Park Police Department
City of St. Louis Park Fire Department
MN VOAD
American Red Cross Twin Cities
Hennepin County Parks and Recreation
Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office
Hennepin County EMS Agencies
Hennepin County Medical Reserve Corps
Salvation Army
Hennepin County Municipal Law Enforcement
Federal Agencies: Department of Homeland Security/FEMA
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• Hennepin County EOP – Annex J. Human Services
• Hennepin County EOP – Support Annex C. Shelter
• Hennepin County EOP – Support Annex D. Mass Care
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• Metro Region EMS Incident Response Plan
• City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
Purpose
This ESF will describe how the Mass Care and Community Service needs of the
citizens of St. Louis Park will be met in the event of an emergency or disaster. This
ESF 6 Mass Care, Housing & Human Services
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 45
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 6
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Mass Care, Housing & Human Services
2
ESF also includes the provision of mass care to professional and volunteer disaster
responders.
Mass Care includes the provision of emergency shelter, and any life care needs for
people in shelters such as food, sanitation, clothing, bedding etc., necessary for the
length of their stay at the Mass Care facility (emergency shelter) depending on the
duration of their sheltering needs. Emergency Human Services includes the
registration of victims in need, referral to victims’ services, and mental health
counseling for victims and responders. Emergency Human Services also includes the
provision of temporary housing, feeding, and basic needs services to people affected
by the disaster who are not staying in shelters or after the shelters have closed.
Mass patient care including the provision of Medical Alternate Care sites, where large
numbers of sick or injured disaster victims/patients are provided temporary in-patient
medical care outside of a hospital or nursing home, is covered in ESF 8 Health and
Medical
Scope
This ESF can be implemented prior to or during an emergency to meet existing or
anticipated needs. It addresses disaster related Mass Care, Housing, and Human
Services issues under all hazard situations. Policies and procedures herein can be
applied to situations ranging from highly localized small-scale events to catastrophic
disasters affecting a large area of the City of St. Louis Park or Hennepin County.
The County may also activate Functional Annex J. Human Services to offer its
shelters to victims of disasters outside the City’s jurisdiction. City of St. Louis Park or
Hennepin County may be called upon in mutual aid to provide shelter space and mass
care to citizens from other cities, counties, and even other states.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex J. Human Services
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Public Health and
Human Services
Hennepin County Emergency
Management
8
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 46
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 6
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Mass Care, Housing & Human Services
3
Purpose
Provide necessary emergency social services and response to basic human needs,
including housing, sheltering assistance, food, clothing and counseling, during an
emergency, natural disaster, or acts of terrorism.
Scope
In an emergency or disaster situation, the County’s Human Services and Public Health
Department (HSPHD) will provide or coordinate the provision of assistance in the basic
areas of food, clothing and shelter for the affected residents of the disaster area within
Hennepin County. In addition the department will work with community partners to assist
with intermediate and long term recovery efforts.
Organization
HSPHD is responsible for the Human Services response and recovery activities when the
Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan is activated. This includes the coordination
of community resources such as the American Red Cross, Salvation Army, faith- based
organizations, and other voluntary and governmental organizations that are involved in human
service response and recovery activities.
Responsibilities
A. Provider Overview
1. HSPHD’s may provide the following basic need support services:
a. Eligibility Supports Programs such as:
• Emergency aid,
• Emergency General Assistance
• Emergency Assistance
• Minnesota Supplemental Aid Emergency Assistance
• Expedited Food Stamps
• Minnesota Family Investment Program
• Medical Assistance
• General Assistance Medical Care
• Food Stamps
• Women Infant Children Supplemental Food Program
b. Social Service Programs may provide:
• Immediate Response
• Family Preservation
• Permanency
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 47
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 6
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Mass Care, Housing & Human Services
4
• Chemical Health Services
• Developmental Disabilities Services
• Mental Health Services
• Services to Seniors
• Services to Persons with Disabilities
• Child care support
c. Interim aid vouchers for food, lodging, transportation and clothing.
d. Support for the provision of congregate sheltering and feeding.
e. Operation and provision of human services at assistance and
disaster recovery centers.
f. Assistance with family reunification.
g. Case coordination.
2. Volunteer Agencies
a. American Red Cross may provide:
• Food for victims and emergency workers
• Registration of victims
• Crisis counseling for victims and emergency workers
• Temporary shelter
• Congregate care
• Clothing
• Cash assistance to victims for emergency needs.
b. Salvation Army may provide:
• Mobile feeding, including hot meals and/or snacks for
disaster victims and emergency workers at the scene of
the disaster.
• Food and commodities distribution
• Temporary shelter
• Bedding
• Clothing
• Furniture
• Collection of donated goods
• Registration and identification of victims
• Missing person services (locating individuals and
answering inquiries from persons outside the disaster
area).
• Counseling and social work services
• Assistance to deal with medical issues
• Referrals to appropriate agencies for special services.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 48
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 6
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Mass Care, Housing & Human Services
5
Support Annex C. Shelter
Purpose
The purpose of this annex is to provide an overview of how shelter management is
implemented.
Assumptions
• Evacuees will seek shelter with friends or relatives rather than go to public shelter
• Evacuees will be provided information as to where they can shelter
• Functional needs evacuees will need assistance relocating.
• Shelters can accommodate household pets
Concept of Operation
Coordination between the requesting agency, organization, or municipality and the
American Red Cross is required in the event shelter is required. Some municipalities have
dedicated plans and space in the event shelter is required; opening those shelters is
based upon of those agreements between those parties.
Hennepin County Emergency Management can assist in the process in acquiring shelter.
A list of shelters that have signed agreements with the American Red Cross is on file with
the Twin Cities Area Chapter and the Central Minnesota Chapter, of the American Red
Cross. The specific site(s) will be selected at the time of the incident, according to needs,
and the use of such facilities is expected to be temporary.
The designated congregate care sites for nuclear generating plants are: Princeton High
school and Rogers High school for the Monticello nuclear generating plant.
Crisis intervention and mental health counseling will need to be provided at shelters
Support Annex D. Mass Care
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Human Services and
Public Health
Hennepin County Emergency
Management
MNVOAD
6
8
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Human Services and
Public Health
Hennepin County Emergency
Management
MNVOAD
6
8
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 49
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 6
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Mass Care, Housing & Human Services
6
Purpose
The purpose of this annex is to provide an overview of how the emergency human service
needs of Hennepin County residents will be met in the event of a major
disaster/emergency. These mass care needs may include: establishment of a reception
center and mass care site, registration of evacuees, disaster welfare inquiry, housing,
feeding, clothing and crisis counseling.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Recreation Center Manager Date
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 50
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park City Manager/Emergency Manager
Primary Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Management
City of St. Louis Park Finance/Controller
Support Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Departments
State Resources: Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management Minnesota All Hazard Incident Management Team III
Minnesota National Guard
MN VOAD
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• City of St. Louis Park Department Standard Operating Procedures
• City of St. Louis Park City Charter
• City of St. Louis Park Ordinance
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex N. Resource Management
• Hennepin County EOP – Support Annex H. Volunteer Coordination
• Hennepin County EOP – Support Annex I. Donations Management
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
Purpose
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) is developed to outline the responsibility for
providing emergency management logistical support within the City of St. Louis Park
and to identify operation needs. This includes the management of donations and
volunteers during an incident.
Scope
Emergency Support Function #7 focuses on the emergency management activities
that support emergency operations throughout City of St. Louis Park. This ESF will
rely heavily on the use of mutual aid for large scale disaster due to the limited number
of resources within the City of St. Louis Park. Emergency Management will assist in
ESF 7 Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 51
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 2
the coordination of an Incident Action Plan with the Emergency Management staff’s
primary focus being the Planning and Logistic Sections position during a disaster.
ESF-7 applies to all individuals and organizations and the full range of Resource
Management services that may be required to support disaster response and
recovery operations. ESF-7 Logistics Management will provide support to all other
ESF’s in regards to resources. This Emergency Support Function (ESF) provides
guidance to assist in coordinating the provision of personnel, equipment, supplies,
facilities and services to support emergency operations. Specifically, ESF-7 Logistics
Management addresses:
• City EOC Logistics
• Resource identification
• Resource procurement
• Resource coordination
• Facilities and logistics
• Personnel augmentation
• Volunteer and donations management
Situations and Assumptions
Offers of Goods
A. The Donations Coordination Team under the direction of the St. Louis Park
Emergency Management Coordinator will handle only unsolicited offers of goods.
Goods that are given to a particular volunteer agency (ie: MNVOADs) are the
responsibility of that organization including transportation, storage, warehousing,
distribution, and disposal of goods.
B. Designated goods left over after a disaster will be distributed or disposed of as the
designated recipient decides.
C. A log will be kept of all offers of undesignated goods and requests for donated
goods.
D. Solicitation of goods donations by the Donations Coordination Team and the
responding voluntary agencies should be carefully coordinated to minimize
confusion, duplication of efforts and gaps in service. Donations Coordination
Team members and volunteer agency responders are to coordinate donation
messages.
E. Partner organizations may open and operate separate warehouse and distribution
facilities for goods that have been donated directly to them. All support
requirements and operation costs of such facilities are the sole responsibility of the
operating organization.
F. Whenever possible, donations of funds should go directly to agencies or
organizations providing assistance. Monetary donations are preferable to
providing donations of goods. Logistics will work with the Finance Section.
Offers of Volunteer Resources
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 52
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 3
A. The Donations Coordination Team will handle/process undesignated offers of
service only. Volunteers who are affiliated with a recognized provider of disaster
assistance (American Red Cross, Salvation Army or other responding
organization) will be responsible for the welfare of their own personnel.
B. All volunteers, whether affiliated with responding organization or not, assisting in a
disaster area must be registered and must wear identification. Personnel wearing
the identification of a responding organization are assumed to the responsibility of
and under the control of the identified group.
C. Minnesota State Statute 12.22 subd. 2a states that “… individuals who volunteer to
assist a local political subdivision during an emergency or disasters, who register
with the subdivision, and who are under the direction and control of that
subdivision, are considered an employee of that subdivision.”
D. As with donated goods, a log will be kept of all service offers of unaffiliated
personnel and requests for donated services.
E. Solicitations for volunteer help by the Donations Coordination Team and by
responding volunteer agencies should be carefully coordinated to minimize
confusion, duplication of efforts, and gaps in service. Donation Coordination Team
members and the voluntary agency liaison must work closely with the St. Louis
Park Public Information Officer and voluntary agency responders to coordinate
requests for volunteers help from the general public.
Offers of Funds
A. Donations of money designated to go to a particular organization or agency
providing assistance need to be made to that organization. The receiving
organization will be responsible for handling the donations according to their
established policies.
B. Donors who attempt to donate to a “general” fund will be referred to one or more of
the organizations or agencies that collect donations and/or respond in a disaster
situation.
C. If monetary donations are received as a last resort, Finance will create a code in
accounting to track the monetary donation.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex N. Resource Management
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Purchasing & Contract
Services
MNVOAD
HSEM
7
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 53
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 4
Policy
Hennepin County Purchasing & Contract Services Rules & Procedures
Purpose
To provide for the overall management of the resources of and available to Hennepin
County on a continuous basis and to provide guidance and outline procedures for
efficiently obtaining, managing, allocating, and monitoring the use of resource during a
disaster.
Scope
This Annex describes how Hennepin County coordinates resource management with
municipal, state and Federal governments and the private sector.
Assumptions
• Procedures have been established for requesting assistance and obtaining
resources during an emergency
• Much of the equipment and many of the supplies required for emergency
operations will come from inventories on hand.
• Donated goods and services can be a valuable source of resources
• Volunteer groups active in disaster will provide such emergency services as shelter
management and mass feeding when requested to do so by local officials.
• Additional supplies and equipment required for emergency operations will
generally be available from normal sources of supply.
• If the municipality is depending on mutual aid to cover resource shortfalls, it
assumes some parties to the agreement will themselves be affected and unable
to provide the resources.
• Pressure on the resource management function to supply unmet needs of
response agencies may be reduced by assistance from the next higher level of
government.
• Resource requirements under emergency conditions will be required for an
extended period of time.
• Commercial services and facilities providing lodging, food services, and fuel near
the affected area may be closed, have limited supplies and resources or be
overwhelmed and unable to support response efforts.
A. MNVOAD
1. Those organizations affiliated with MNVOAD can provide a variety of resources
including but not limited to volunteers and volunteer management, food,
management of donated goods, amateur radio operators, and household pet or
service animal evacuation and sheltering.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 54
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 5
Support Annex H. Volunteer Coordination
Policy
Local governments have primary responsibility, in coordination with VOADs, to develop
and implement plans to manage volunteer services.
The volunteer coordination process must be organized to ensure that volunteers are able
to provide to appropriate and timely types of volunteer services when requested, in a
manner that precludes interference with or hampering of emergency operations.
The Emergency Management Coordinator from each jurisdiction should consider the
following:
• Coordinate with other agencies to ensure goods and resources are used
Effectively
• Looks principally to those organizations with established volunteer management
structures
• Encourages volunteerism through recognized non-profit volunteer organizations
• Encourages individuals to participate through local Citizen’s Corps Council and/or
affiliate with a recognized organization
• Encourages the use of existing nongovernmental organizational volunteer and
resources before seeking governmental assistance.
Purpose
The Volunteer Support Annex describes the coordinating processes used to ensure the
most efficient and effective utilization of unaffiliated volunteers during disasters.
Scope
During an emergency, volunteer support may occur regardless of request or whether the
volunteer support meets an identified need. Volunteer services in this annex refer to
unsolicited goods, and unaffiliated volunteer services. Although unaffiliated volunteers
can be significant resources and because they do not have pre-established relationships
with emergency response organizations, verifying their training or credentials and
matching them with the appropriate service areas can be difficult.
1. Volunteer Coordination - involves a process for effectively matching unaffiliated
spontaneous volunteers with credible voluntary organizations. The County encourages
individuals to affiliate with a Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (VOAD) member
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
MNVOAD
Municipalities 7
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 55
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 6
agency, or other credible organization, to volunteer their services in relief and recovery
activities.
Assumptions
• Lack of an organized system of management for volunteers will result in chaos and
detract from an otherwise effective disaster response. Without controls, volunteers
can overwhelm the staging area
• Volunteerism activities may begin before a Federal Disaster Declaration.
• Local agencies accept, care for, and manage their own volunteers.
• The timely release of appropriate information to the public regarding the
recruitment and necessity of volunteers during an event is a seamless transition
• This Annex was designed to coordinate the application of resources during times
of disaster; it does not direct any individual or private community organization’s
policies concerning gifts or donations. Individual organizations will operate
under their own administrative protocols.
• In a wide scale disaster, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Region V may establish a regional disaster donations program for the benefit of all
states in Region V.
Support Annex I. Donations Management
Policy
Local governments have primary responsibility, in coordination with VOADs, to develop
and implement plans to manage donated goods.
The donation management process must be organized and coordinated to ensure that the
citizens of Hennepin County are able to take advantage of the appropriate types and
amounts of donated goods and services in a manner that precludes interference with or
hampering of emergency operations.
The Emergency Management Coordinator from each jurisdiction should consider the
following:
• Coordinate with other agencies to ensure goods and resources are used
Effectively
• Looks principally to those organizations with established donations management
structures
• Encourage cash donations through recognized non-profit volunteer organizations
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
MNVOAD
Municipalities 7
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 56
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 7
• Encourage individuals to participate through local Citizen’s Corps Council and/or
affiliate with a recognized organization
• Encourages the use of existing nongovernmental organizational before seeking
governmental assistance.
Purpose
The Donations Management Support Annex describes the coordinating processes used
to ensure the most efficient and effective utilization of unaffiliated donated goods during
disasters.
Scope
During an emergency, Donated goods may occur regardless of request or whether the
items donated meets an identified need. Donation management in this annex refers to
unsolicited goods, and unaffiliated donation services. Although unaffiliated donations can
be a significant resource and because they do not have pre-established relationships with
emergency response organizations, coordinating the need, tracking and distribution to
match families can be difficult.
1. Donations Management - involves a process for effectively matching unsolicited
undesignated in-kind donations with credible voluntary organizations. The County
encourages individuals to contribute donations to a VOAD member agency, or other
credible organization. The County encourages the donations in the form of financial
contributions whenever possible.
Assumptions
• Lack of an organized system of management of donations will result in chaos and
detract from an otherwise effective disaster response. Without controls, large
amounts of unsolicited, unusable donations will be sent.
• Donation activities may begin before a Federal Disaster Declaration.
• Local agencies accept, care for, and manage all donated goods.
• The timely release of appropriate information to the public regarding the
recruitment and necessity of donated goods during an event is a seamless
transition
• The donation of money is the most desirable and practical. Monetary donations
require little manpower to process, can be used directly to relieve suffering, can be
used to buy needed disaster items, and can assist the recovery of the affected
economy.
• This Annex was designed to coordinate the application of resources during times
of disaster; it does not direct any individual or private community organization’s
policies concerning gifts or donations. Individual organizations will operate under
their own administrative protocols.
• In a wide scale disaster, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 57
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 8
Region V may establish a regional disaster donations program for the benefit of all
states in Region V.
Organization
A. Donations Coordination Team
The municipal Emergency Management Director of the jurisdiction having authority
will designate an individual to assist the Donations Coordination Team in
facilitating transactions concerning offers of cash, goods and services and
volunteers during the disaster operations. The team is made up of the Volunteer
Resource Coordinator, Donated Goods Coordinator, and the Financial
Coordinator.
B. Donations Coordination Center
The state donations coordinator and representatives of participating volunteer
organizations will be assigned to a Donations Coordination Center at the onset of a
disaster. This Donations Coordination Center will be the central location for the
Donations Coordination Team. The Center will be located at a location that has
adequate resources to maintain operations, i.e., phone lines, computer access,
close to the EOC, restrooms and kitchen, and emergency power.
The Donations Coordination Center is tasked with sorting, disposing of or refusing
goods, managing, and facilitating the matching of donated goods and services with
all organizations involved. The command post will work in conjunction with the
affected jurisdictions Emergency Operation Centers.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Finance Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 58
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 7
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Logistics & Volunteer/Donations Management
Page I 9
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 59
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 8
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Health and Medical Services
Page | 1
City of Saint Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Assistant Fire Chief EMS
Primary Agency: City of St. Louis Park Fire Department
Support Agencies: Hennepin County Department of Public Health
Hennepin County Medical Examiner
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department
Hennepin County Public Works
Hennepin County Community Services
Minnesota Department of Health
Metro Hospitals
MNVOADS Local Clinics
Local Mortuaries
Local Pharmacies
Local Veterinarian Clinics
Local Nursing homes
Local Homecare Services
Local EMS providers
Local Fire Departments
Hennepin County Medical Reserve Corps
Metro Region Regional Hospital Resource Center
State Resources: Emergency & Communication Health Outreach
(ECHO)
Minnesota Board of Animal Health
Minnesota Department of Agriculture
Minnesota Department of Corrections
Minnesota Department of Human Services
Minnesota Department of Health:
• Environmental Health Division
• Infectious Disease, Epidemiology, Prevention
and Control Division
• Office of Communication
• Office of Emergency Preparedness
• Office of Public Health Practice
• Public Health Laboratory Division
ESF 8 Health & Medical
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 60
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 8
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Health and Medical Services
Page | 2
• Professional Workforce and Development Unit
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Department of Public Safety
• Homeland Security and Emergency
Management
• Minnesota Duty Officer
Minnesota National Guard
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
Federal Resources: Department of Health & Human Services
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Food and Drug Administration
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration
Department of Homeland Security
• Federal Emergency Management Agency
Environmental Protection Agency
Department of Agriculture
Office of the U.S. Surgeon General
• Office of the Civilian Medical Reserve Corps
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• City of St. Louis Park SOGs
• Hennepin County Community Health & Environmental Service Response
SOP’s
• Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
• Hennepin County PHE Response Recovery Plan
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• Metro Region Area Mortuary Plan
• Metro Region EMS Incident Response Plan
• Minnesota Metro Region Pharmaceutical Cache Plan
• Metro Region Hospital Annex L
Purpose
ESF #8 - Health and Medical Services (ESF #8) provides the organization,
mobilization, and coordination of public health and medical services in a health
emergency (imminent or ongoing) or during other emergencies or disasters that
require the involvement of or activation of ESF #8. The primary agency and each
support agency maintain their own emergency plans and are integrated into this
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 61
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 8
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Health and Medical Services
Page | 3
ESF describing additional policies and operations specific to City of St. Louis
Park and or Hennepin County.
Scope
ESF #8 involves all primary and support agencies to provide supplemental
assistance to local jurisdictions in identifying and meeting the health and medical
needs of victims of an emergency or disaster.
Primary Responsibilities
If a serious disaster resulting in multiple casualties occurs in the City of St. Louis
Park, overall coordination of the various health/medical organizations response
to the disaster is the responsibility of the St. Louis Park Fire Department
Assistant Fire Chief and would take place on scene or at the EOC in coordination
with an EMS Supervisor and MRCC.
A. Patient Care: East and West MRCC will assist in coordinating where
patients should go during a MCI Event.
B. Ambulance Services: Hennepin County EMS and their Mutual aid
services would be primary transporting agencies, if additional units are
needed the Metro Region Incident Response Plan can be implemented.
C. First Aid: St. Louis Park Emergency Personnel, Hennepin County EMS
personnel and other regional EMS personnel would be available to
provide immediate first aid to disaster victims with injuries.
D. Emergency Mortuary Operations: Would be the responsibility of the
Hennepin County medical examiner.
E. Health Threats: Serious potential or actual health problems (epidemics,
food and/or water contamination, etc.) associated with a disaster would be
the responsibility of the Hennepin County Public Health.
F. Inquiry and referral Service: Would be per Hennepin County Public Health
SOPs
G. If CISM is needed, resources are available through WMRCC.
H. St. Louis Park Fire Department maintains a list of resources needed in a
MCI or public health event.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under
please reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex G. Medical Services
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 62
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 8
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Health and Medical Services
Page | 4
Purpose
To provide, coordinate, or facilitate Emergency Medical Services in the event of a
disaster.
Scope
The emergency functions of HCMC will be centered on the:
1. Provision of emergency medical care and transportation for victims of a
disaster occurring within Hennepin County.
2. Regional Hospital Resource Center (RHRC): HCMC is the designated
regional hospital that performs clearinghouse functions for information
during a disaster and may act to match available and requested resources
from different facilities during a disaster situation.
3. Resource needs may also be communicated from the RHRC to Hennepin
County Emergency Preparedness and public health agencies.
Organization
HCMC is the primary county agency for medical response to include health and
medical care. HCMC will assist the overall emergency response with coordination
of emergency medical care and treatment activities in Hennepin County. HCMC
will utilize those services and facilities of public, private or volunteer health and
medical agencies necessary to render appropriate health and medical support for
the disaster. HCMC will operate according to the HCMC Emergency Plan and
EMS Incident Management Plan.
The listed agencies may also provide assistance with special needs populations
during a disaster
Service Provider Number
Case Work American Red Cross
Case Work Catholic Charities
Case Work Lutheran Disaster Response
Case Work United Methodist Committee on
Relief
Transportation American Red Cross
Lead Department Supporting Department Emergency Support Function
Hennepin County Medical
Center (HCMC)
8
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 63
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 8
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Health and Medical Services
Page | 5
Adult Day care The Salvation Army (Metro Only)
Control
A. HCMC will use the Hospital Incident Command System (HICS) for overall
command and control within the hospital.
B. Emergency medical care and treatment activities will be primarily
coordinated from the HCMC Hospital Command Center (HCC).
C. HCMC is the designated Regional Hospital Resource Center (RHRC) for
the 7 county metropolitan areas. During complex, protracted or
catastrophic emergencies HCMC would open the RHRC Emergency
Coordination Center and manage the situation in accordance with the
MDH Office of Emergency Preparedness Emergency Operations Plan -
Annex L: Medical Care Plan - Metropolitan Region.
D. The HCMC Incident Commander or designee will be present at the HCMC
HCC.
E. If the scope of the incident exceeds the ability of HCMC to coordinate
emergency medical functions from the HCMC HCC, the coordination
function will be moved the County EOC.
F. The line of succession for incident operations is detailed in the HCMC
Emergency Operations Plan.
Support Annex F. Mass Fatality
Purpose
To provide emergency medical examiner services required during a mass fatality
incident including recovery, identification, examination and storage of remains
until family members can be contacted.
A mass fatality incident is defined as an occurrence where multiple deaths
overwhelm the capability of the Medical Examiner (ME). The ME will access and
determine if implementation supersedes his local resources. This plan may also
be implemented for an incident where the caseload is manageable, but requires a
prolonged or more involved on-site commitment.
Organization
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County Medical
Examiner
Metropolitan Airports Commission 8
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 64
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 8
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Health and Medical Services
Page | 6
The ME responsibilities during an emergency will be carried out with existing ME
personnel, augmented as necessary by public and private services. Functions of
the ME include those duties that are normally performed on a daily basis, but
greatly expanded in the event of a mass fatality incident. Staff will be organized
to allow for increased caseload during these situations. This will require
specialized units and augmented staff to accomplish activities such as recovery,
identification, examination and record keeping.
Control
Location
For disasters that typically involve less than 30 confirmed as deceased in
one location, the bodies will be transported to the ME for further
examination. If the physical structure of the ME has been impaired, the
Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) will be contacted per
agreement and a temporary morgue with associated services will be
utilized on MAC property. MAC property is also to be used when the size
of the disaster exceeds available space at the ME office.
Line of succession
The Chief Medical Examiner (CME) will be in charge of overall disaster
services to the deceased. In the event the CME is not available, a
designee of the CME will perform those duties.
Responsibilities
General
A. The ME will coordinate emergency medical examiner services with
County and local communities within our jurisdiction. The ME will
continue to provide service to the rest of the County during mass
fatality situations, as outlined in MN Statue 390.
County EOC
A. If the event warrants the use of an Emergency Operations Center
(EOC), the ME will have a designated liaison with that function.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 65
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 8
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Health and Medical Services
Page | 7
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
St. Louis Park Assistant Fire Chief Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 66
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 9
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Search & Rescue
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief
Primary Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Fire Department
City of St. Louis Park Police, Explorers, and Reserves
Hennepin County Municipal Fire Departments
Minnesota Task Force 1 and Collapse Structure Rescue
Support Agencies: Hennepin County Emergency Communications Center
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
MN VOAD
Emergency Medical Services
Hennepin County Sheriffs and Reserves
Hennepin County RACES
State Resources: Minnesota State Patrol
Minnesota State Duty Officer
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emergency
Management
Minnesota National Guard
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
MinnSARDA (Minnesota Search and Rescue Dog Association
Minnesota Civil Air Patrol
United States Coast Guard
Federal Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) Teams
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
o City of St. Louis Park Fire Department Standard Operating Guidelines
o City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
o Hennepin County Fire Departments Standard Operating Procedures
o Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex E. Search and Rescue
o Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
ESF 9 Search & Rescue
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 67
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 9
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Search & Rescue
Page I 2
o Metro Region EMS Incident Response Plan
o NFPA 1006: Standard for Technical Rescuer Professional Qualifications.
o NFPA 1670: Standard on Operations and Training for Technical Search and
Rescue Incidents.
Purpose
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) is developed to outline the responsibility for
providing search and rescue support within City of St. Louis Park and to identify the
emergency operational needs to support a search and rescue operation.
Scope
Emergency Support Function #9 focuses on search and rescue operation activities
that This ESF will rely heavily on the use of mutual aid for large scale disaster due to
the limited number of resources the City of St. Louis Park has available. Within the
City of St. Louis Park, the primary responsibility for search and rescue belongs to the
City of St. Louis Park Fire Department. Additional assistance for search and rescue
can come from a wide variety of appropriate resources available.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex E. Search and Rescue
PURPOSE
The purpose of this annex is to describe the various local government responsibilities in
the area of search and rescue.
POLICY
Search and rescue is primarily a local government responsibility. State government
assistance in this area will normally be initiated at the request of local government.
Local government requests for Minnesota CAP assistance must be submitted to the
MDO.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Sheriff
Municipal Law Enforcement
Federal Law Enforcement
9
13
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 68
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 9
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Search & Rescue
Page I 3
Requests for assistance from a search and rescue dog organization are normally
submitted directly to such organization by local law enforcement authorities. However, a
local or state agency wanting help in obtaining the services of such an organization may
contact the MDO.
Local Government
Police and fire departments, sheriff's departments and special rescue organizations have
the primary responsibility for search and rescue operations.
When requested in accordance with established procedures, and on order of the
Governor, the National Guard can:
a. Support both ground and air searches with resources such as aircraft (fixed and
rotary wing), night vision devices and large search parties.
b. Provide logistical support (transportation, communications, shelters, field kitchens,
etc.) to search and rescue operations.
SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS/AGENCIES
Depending upon the nature, location and extent of the search and rescue effort, several
private-sector organizations and agencies may be able to provide assistance, including
one or more of the following:
A. The Minnesota CAP, which can provide both aerial reconnaissance and ground search
personnel.
B. Several voluntary organizations are available to provide dogs for search and rescue
support. These organizations can be accessed through the MNVOAD Liaison or through
the MDO.
C. In some cases, volunteers from local Citizen Corps programs may be available to
assist local search and rescue efforts. Citizen Corps responders are activated by their
local leadership but may be called upon from other jurisdictions, through Mutual Aid.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 69
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 9
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Search & Rescue
Page I 4
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 70
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief
Primary Agencies: Municipal Fire Departments in Hennepin County
Support Agencies: Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office (WCSO)
Hennepin County Emergency Management (WCEM)
Hennepin County Department of Public Health
Emergency Medical Services (EMS)
State Resources: Minnesota State Patrol (MSP)
Minnesota State Duty Officer
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Minnesota National Guard (MNNG)
Minnesota National Guard 55th Civil Support Team (CST)
Minnesota State Fire Marshalls Office
Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA)
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
Minnesota Hazardous Materials Teams
Regional Chemical Assessment Teams (CAT)
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Minneapolis Bomb Squad
Federal Resources: National Regional Response Team
National Response Center
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• St. Louis Park Fire Department Standard Operating Guidelines
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex M. Environmental Response
• Hennepin County EOP - Incident Annex N. Toxic or Explosive Industrial
Compound Release
• Metro Region EMS Incident Response Plan
• Minnesota Fire Chiefs Intrastate Mutual Aid Plan
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
ESF 10 Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 71
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 2
• 299 a. f. j, k 115 e, b, c, general
• Minnesota State Statute 2011 299F.01 to 2011 299F.099
• OSHA 1910.120 Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response
• NFPA 472
• NFPA 473
Federal Statutes
• 10 U.S.C. 382 (2002) Emergencies Involving Chemical or Biological Weapons;
• 18 U.S.C. 831(e) (2002) Emergencies Involving Nuclear Materials;
• 29 U.S.C. 651-678 (2002) The Occupational Safety and Health Act;
• 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. (1977) The Clean Water Act;
• 42 U.S.C. 11001-11050 EPCRA;
• 42 U.S.C. 2011-2297 (2003) The Atomic Energy Act of 1954;
• 42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq. (1976) The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act;
• 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q (1990) The Clean Air Act;
• 42 U.S.C. 9601-9675 (2002) The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
• Compensation, and Liability Act;
• 49 U.S.C. 5101-5128 (2002) Transportation of HazMat;
• 49 U.S.C. 60101-60301 (2006) Pipeline Safety;
• 50 U.S.C. 2301-2368 (2003) The Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction
Act;
• Public Law 95-91, 91 Stat. 567 (1977) The Department of Energy Organization
Act;
• Public Law 100-408, 102 Stat. 1066 (1988) The Price-Anderson Act of 1988; and
• Public Law 101-380, 104 Stat. 484 (1990) The Oil Pollution Act of 1990.
Federal Supporting Plans
• National Response Framework;
• Natural Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan;
• Nuclear Regulation 0654/FEMA-REP-1, which provides federal guidance for
development and review of Radiological Emergency Management Plans for
Nuclear Power Plants;
• “Interagency Radiological Assistance Plan” (Interim), U.S. DOE, Region V;
• The FBI’s Concept of Operations for Weapons of Mass Destruction;
• The Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan;
• Federal Response Plan Terrorism Incident Annex;
• Federal Response Plan Terrorism Incident Overview;
• Chemical/Biological Incident Contingency Plan (FBI, Unclassified); and
• Nuclear Incident Contingency Plan (FBI, Unclassified).
Purpose
Emergency Support (ESF) #10 provides support activities in the prevention,
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 72
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 3
preparedness, response and recovery actions resulting from actual or potential
discharged and/or uncontrolled release of oil and hazardous materials response.
Scope
Emergency Support Function #10 provides for a coordinated response to actual or
potential hazardous materials incident. This ESF will rely heavily on the use of mutual aid
for large scale disaster due to the limited number of resources each Hennepin County fire
department has. In addition, Hennepin County Fire Departments will coordinate the
overall operation section of Incident Action Plan (IAP).
For purposes of this ESF, “hazardous materials” is a general term intended to mean
hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants as defined in the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), 40 CFR Part 300.
In part, these substances include:
• Extremely Hazardous Substances as described by the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) or MN Pollution Control Agency (PCA)
• Agents classified as Chemical Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosives
(CBRNE) or Agents defines as Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)2
ESF #10 – Hazardous Materials
• Chemicals improperly or illegally mixed to produce an explosion, poisonous
compound, fire or noxious gas and require public safety response.
• Hazardous Waste, which are a danger to the environmental when they are
improperly disposed of, stored, or released and require that immediate
protective measures have to be taken to protect life and property when
discovered. (This includes the waste produced by illegal drug manufacture.)
• Radiological Material improperly or illegally stored, transported or released, or
radiological material dispersed by accident or intentionally.
• Biological material or waste that is illegally stored, transported, or released, or
is dispersed by accident or intentionally.
• Devices that contain flammable liquids and are used to commit Arson.
Most of the agencies with ESF #10 responsibilities have existing emergency plans and
procedures for routine response to HazMat incidents. This annex does not take the
place of these plans. Rather it is designed to ensure that specific hazardous materials
planning requirements are met and mitigation, prevention, response, and recovery
activities are coordinated across disciplines and between jurisdictions.
The scope of ESF #10 includes the appropriate actions to prepare for, respond to, and
recover from a threat to public health, welfare, or the environment caused by actual or
potential oil and hazardous materials incidents. Appropriate general actions can include,
but are not limited to: actions to prevent, minimize, or mitigate a release; efforts to
detect and assess the extent of contamination (including sampling and analysis and
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 73
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 4
environmental monitoring); actions to stabilize the release and prevent the spread of
contamination; analysis of options for environmental cleanup and waste disposition;
implementation of environmental cleanup; and storage, treatment, and disposal of oil
and hazardous materials.
Examples of specific actions may include: sampling a drinking water supply to
determine if there has been intentional or accidental contamination; stabilizing the
release through the use of berms, dikes, or impoundments; capping of contaminated
soils or sludge; use of chemicals and other materials to contain or retard the spread of
the release or mitigate its effects; decontaminating buildings and structures; using
drainage controls, fences, warning signs, or other security or site-control precautions;
removing highly contaminated soils from drainage areas; removing drums, barrels,
tanks, or other bulk containers that contain oil or hazardous materials; and other
measures as deemed necessary.
The process and procedures established in city, county, regional, and state standard
operating guidelines (SOG’s) and other emergency plans will be followed in responding to
an emergency or disaster. This annex does not take the place of these plans; rather it is
designed to ensure that specific hazardous materials planning requirements are met and
mitigation, prevention, response and recovery activities are coordinated across disciplines
and between jurisdictions.
Each jurisdictional Fire Chief has the authority to implement coordination for a fire and
rescue resource mobilization in the event of an actual or potential oil and/or hazardous
materials incident and to request a resource mobilization through the Minnesota State
Duty Officer.
Response to Hazardous Materials Incidents
A. Pre-Identification and Analysis of Risk. In response to the requirements and
recommendations contained in the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act (SARA) of 1986, Title III, as well as other legislation, the following
facilities/locations within the city have been pre-identified (see City of St. Louis
Park SARA sites):
1. “Covered” facilities. (Facilities that possess extremely hazardous
materials.)
2. Facilities (schools, hospitals, nursing homes, etc.) at risk due to their
proximity to facilities with extremely hazardous materials.
3. Transportation routes (highways, railroad lines, etc) for extremely
hazardous materials.
4. Pipelines (as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 299J).
B. Determination that a Release of Hazardous Materials has occurred – Facilities.
Facilities located within the city that use, store, manufacture or transport hazardous
materials are responsible for developing systems and training their employees so
as to be able to promptly determine and report that a release of hazardous
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 74
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 5
materials has occurred. The systems, methods and/or procedures in place at each
facility for determining that a release has occurred, along with a brief description of
any specialized system (i.e. monitor/sensor system), are to be described in the
facility emergency plans.
C. Determination that a Release of Hazardous Materials has occurred – Emergency
Responders. Similarly, city government employees (or their designee) who
respond to hazardous materials incidents have received training designed to help
them properly respond to such incidents. At the minimum, personnel are trained at
the First Responder Awareness level, as defined in 29 CFR 1910.120.
1. Emergency responders and city employees who respond to hazardous
materials incidents within the City of St. Louis Park have received training
designed to help them properly respond to such incidents. At the minimum,
city personnel are trained at the First Responder Awareness Level, as defined
in 29 CFR 1910.120.
2. Hennepin County Medical Center (HCMC) Ambulance Service is the primary
EMS transport agency for the City of St. Louis Park. HCMC personnel and
their designated mutual aid ambulance services are trained to and respond at
the First Responder Awareness Level, as defined in 29 CFR 1910.120.
Training records are maintained by the HCMC Training Officer.
3. St. Louis Park Fire Department is trained to, equipped and responds at the
Haz-Mat Operations Level as defined in 29 CFR 1910.120. Training Records
are maintained by the Fire Department Training Officer.
D. Response to a Release of Hazardous Materials.
1. The city has conducted a hazard analysis to determine potential populations
and facilities which might be affected by a hazardous materials emergency.
The resource/methodology used to determine the area of the city likely to be
affected includes the U.S. DOT Emergency Response Guidebook, CAMEO and
facility preplans.
2. Facilities within the city that possess extremely hazardous materials are
required to develop and maintain emergency response plans as specified in
29CFR 1910.120, or emergency action plans as specified in 29 CFR
1910.38(a) that their employees will follow in the event of a release of those
materials. At a minimum, facilities are required by law to immediately notify the
following in the event of an accidental emergency release; local authorities by
dialing 9-1-1, state authorities by contacting the State Duty Officer by dialing
649-5451 (Metro) or 1-800-422-0798 (Greater Minnesota), and the National
Center by dialing 1-800-424-8802.
E. Hazardous Materials Response Capabilities.
1. Within the city, the Saint Louis Park fire department ahs the primary
responsibility for responding to hazardous materials incidents. This department
is trained and equipped to the First Responder Awareness level of hazardous
materials response. In addition, the St. Paul Fire Department hazardous
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 75
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 6
materials response team may participate in the response. These departments
have developed emergency response plans as appropriate for their level of
hazardous materials response capability.
2. First responders will begin their determination of the area affected by
hazardous materials release by identifying/verifying the hazardous material(s)
involved. For the most part, they will then rely on the following methodology to
determine the need for evacuation, and the area of the city to evacuate:
previously conducted hazard analysis, facility input, resource manuals, CAMEO
or other computer software, and/or other methods.
F. A listing of emergency equipment and facilities owned by public agencies and
available for use in response to a hazardous materials accident is located in the
Emergency Action Plan (resource manual).
G. A description of the evacuation/shelter-in-place procedures/information to be used
for the protection of public in the event of a hazardous materials release is
contained in the Evacuation, Traffic Control and Security ETCS) Annex, and
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), to this plan.
III. State Support
In the event of hazardous materials incident that is beyond the capabilities of city
government, assistance from county, state agencies can be requested. Such requests
should be submitted to the State Duty Officer (649-5451 Metro or 1-800-422-0798
Greater Minnesota).
IV. Federal Support
A. In the event of a hazardous materials incident that is beyond the capabilities of
municipal, county and state government, the national Regional Response
Team can be requested through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA). Requests for such assistance should be submitted to the State Duty
Officer.
B. Reimbursement of costs for a hazardous materials response may be available.
To be eligible for reimbursement, contact the National Response Center (1-
800-424-8802) and the MPCA within 24 hours of the incident, and
subsequently submit an application for reimbursement.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 76
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 7
An example of a possible HAZMAT Incident Command System within City of St. Louis Park
ICS Chart: Key
Green- Hazmat Awareness Level
Orange- Hazmat Operations Level
Yellow- Hazmat Technician Level
Red- Incident Commander- Operations Level Minimum per 1910.120
Safety Officer
Local FD
Liaison Officer
HCEM
UIC
SLP/CAT
Hennepin County
EOC
Incident Manager
Planning
Section
Chief
SLP/IMT
Situation
Unit
Leader
Logistics
Section
Chief
SLP/IMT
Operations
Section
Chief
Local HAZMAT
HAZMAT
Branch
MN CAT
Fire
Branch
Local FD
LE
Branch
Local LE
PW
Branch
City or
County
EMS
Branch
Local EMS
Entry
Group
MN CAT
Decon
Group
Local FD
Monitor
Group
MN CAT
Science
Officer
MN CAT
MRCC
HCMC
EVAC
Traffic Control
Sheriff, Local PD,
State Patrol
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 77
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 8
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex M. Environmental Response
PURPOSE
The purpose of this annex is to provide a summary of responsibilities in the area of
environmental hazard response. It focuses on the environmental impact of
accidents/incidents involving hazardous materials.
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
When a responsible party can be identified, relative to a hazardous materials
accident/incident, that party is required to clean up the site and minimize the impact to the
environment.
In the event of a hazardous materials incident that is beyond the capabilities of both local
and county government, a HAZMAT Regional Response Team can be requested by local
authorities through the MDO.
Incident Annex H. Radiological Release
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Environmental
Services
Hennepin County Emergency
management
10
5
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Emergency
Management
• Brooklyn Center Fire
• Dayton Fire
• Hennepin County Public Health
• Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office
• Minneapolis Fire
• Minneapolis Health & Family Support
• Rogers Fire
• Rogers Police
7, 10, 12
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 78
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 9
Purpose
The Hennepin County Radiological Emergency Response Annex is a hazard-specific
component of the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan. It has been developed
to provide a sound basis for radiological emergency preparedness and to establish the
organizational framework, its operational concepts and procedures designed to minimize
the loss of life and property, and to expedite the restoration of essential services following
a radiological emergency. This annex provides an overview of how the County will
respond to a radiological emergency.
This Hazard Specific Annex provides guidance in the event of a radiological emergency at
the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP).
Scope
This annex applies to incidents occurring at a fixed nuclear facility; those caused by a
transportation accident involving radiological materials and terrorist events involving
radiological materials.
This annex also:
• Provides for warning and Instruction to the public and for the implementation of
protective actions to be taken during a radiological emergency.
• Provides guidance to agencies as to their emergency preparedness and operating
responsibilities in preparing for and coping with a radiological emergency to
minimize radiation exposure and environmental contamination.
• Provides a basis for the preparation of detailed Radiological Emergency Response
Plans, procedures, and training programs by agencies.
• Assigns responsibilities to agencies in radiological emergency response and
preparedness.
Assumptions
• Radiological incidents may not be immediately recognized as such until the
radioactive material is detected or the effects of radiation exposure are manifested
in the population.
• An act of radiological terrorism, particularly an act directed against a large
population center, will have major consequences that can overwhelm the
capabilities of many local and state governments to respond and may seriously
challenge existing Federal response capabilities.
• An incident involving the potential release of radioactivity may require the
implementation of protective measures.
Incident Annex N. Toxic or Explosive Industrial Compound Release
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 79
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 10
Policy
Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Title 40 Protection of the Environment
CFR Title 49 Transportation of Hazardous Material
Minnesota Statute 221.0341
Purpose and Scope
This annex outlines the requirements for local jurisdictions in the management of
chemical and biological spills to minimize effects on health and safety from
exposure to those spills and reduce the impact on the citizens of Hennepin County and
its environment. The following procedure applies to all citizens of the county and those
contractors where chemical substances are transported, purchased, stored, handled, or
used, including vehicles of visitors or suppliers who bring substances into Hennepin
County that are potentially hazardous. Hazmat recovery focuses on those actions that
must be taken to restore services and normal operations in the event that a significant
loss has occurred.
Assumptions
1. Disasters involving hazardous materials are usually confined to a localized area.
Actions should be taken to contain the spill as promptly as possible.
2. Depending on the magnitude, nature, and threatened area, the resources of industry,
local, state, and federal government, separately or in combination, may be required to
cope with the situation.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
MN Dept. of Transportation
MN Pollution Control Agency
MN Dept. of Agriculture
MN Health Department
MN Dept. of Natural
Resources
HSEM
Hennepin County Emergency
Management
Municipalities
1, 8, 11
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 80
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 11
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
State of Minnesota
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 81
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 12
Division of Emergency Management
24-Hour Duty Officer
STATEWIDE EMERGENCY NUMBER
1-800-422-0798
METRO AREA (651) 649-5451
D Attachment 1
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
RESPONSE LEVEL DESCRIPTIONS
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 82
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 13
Response Level I - Potential Emergency Conditions
An incident or threat of a release wh ich can be controlled by the first response
agencies and does not require evacuation of other than the involved structure or
the immediate outdoor area. The incident is confined to a small area and does not
pose an immediate threat to life or property.
Response Level I I - Potential Emergency Conditions
An incident involving a greater hazard or larger area which poses a potential
threat to life or property and which may require a limited evacuation of the
surrounding area.
Response Level I I I - Potential Emergency Conditions
An incident involving a severe hazard or a large area which poses an extreme
threat to life and property and will probably require a large-scale evacuation; or
an incident requiring the expertise or resources of County, State, Federal or
private agencies/organizations.
Safety Health Risks
The PSAP, mobile incident command vehicle, and Police/Fire Supervisory Units
all have copies of the North American Response Guidebook which details
hazardous material, proper responses, self -help, fi rst aid, and other related
information. This reference guidebook is updated regularly by the US
Department of Transportation and should be used as a reference guide. A copy is
also on file at the EOC.
The contacts listed are only a guideline, any and all agencies could be contacted at
any level as the situation would dictate. Additional Resources from the public and
private sector should be considered.
Attachment 2
I. Hazardous Materials Notification List
For all Response Level I, II, and III incidents the following agencies are to be
contacted:
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 83
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 14
• State Duty Officer: (651) 649-5451*
• CHEMTREC: 1-800-424-9300
• National Response Center: 1 -800-424-8802 or (202) 267-2675
*The State Duty Officer is responsible for notifying ALL appropriate State and
Federal agencies, therefore it is essential to keep the State Duty Officer aware of the
situation should it escalate.
Level I Contacts: Need for notification determined Shift Duty Supervisor or On- Duty Police
Sergeant.
• Emergency Preparedness Director
• Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
• Deputy Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
• State Duty Officer
If these people are unavailable and the Shift Duty Supervisor or On-Duty Sergeant deems it
necessary notify:
• Police Captain
• Battalion Chief
Level II Contacts: Need for notification determined Shift Duty Supervisor or On- Duty Police
Sergeant.
• State Duty Officer
• Emergency Preparedness Director
• Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
• Deputy Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
• Public Works Director
If these people are unavailable and the Shift Duty Supervisor or On-Duty Sergeant deems it
necessary notify:
• Police Captain
• Battalion Chief
Attachment 3
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 84
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 15
Level III Contacts: Need for notification determined Shift Duty Supervisor or On- Duty Police
Sergeant.
• State Duty Officer
• Emergency Preparedness Director
• Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
• Deputy Emergency Preparedness Coordinator
• Public Works Director
• Hennepin County Emergency Preparedness Director
• Mayor
If these people are unavailable and the Shift Duty Supervisor or On-Duty Sergeant deems it
necessary notify:
• Police Captain
• Battalion Chief
ALL NAMES AND NUMBERS ARE AVAILABLE FROM THE
RESOURCE MANUAL AND PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 85
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 16
Attachment 3
REQUIREMENTS OF SARA SITES
A listing of all SARA covered facilities for the City of St. Louis Park is located in the EOC and is
labeled “SARA Facilities”.
Facilities that are subject to Section 302 of Title III submit contingency plans which are kept on
file in the Emergency Management Office of the City of St. Louis Park.
The contingency plans include methods and procedures to respond to a release of extremely
hazardous substances. The plans also include descriptions of emergency equipment available
within the facility and persons responsible for such equipment.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 86
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 17
Attachment 4
S.A.R.A. 302 Sites
1. Douglas Corporation – Plating Division
3520 Xenwood Ave. S
St. Louis Park, Mn 55416
2. Flame Metals Processing Corp.
7317 W. Lake St.
St. Louis Park, Mn 55426
3. Hardcoat Inc.
7300 W. Lake St.
St. Louis Park, Mn 55426
4. NAPA
7400 W. 27th St
St. Louis Park, Mn 55426
5. Novartis Nutrition Corp.
5320 W. 23rd St.
St. Louis Park, Mn 55416
6. St. Louis Park Junior High School
2025 Texas Ave S.
St. Louis Park, Mn 55426
7. St. Louis Park Senior High School
6425 W. 33rd St.
St. Louis Park, Mn 55426
8. St. Louis Park Water Plant #1
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 87
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 18
2936 Idaho Ave. So
St. Louis Park, Mn 55426
Facility Coordinators names and phone numbers are listed in the resource manual
Attachment 5
S.A.R.A. 302 Sites (continued)
9. St. Louis Park Water Plant #4
4701 W. 41st Street
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
10. St. Louis Park Water Plant #5
8301 W. 34th Street
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
11. St. Louis Park Water Plant #6
4241 Zarthan Ave. S
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
12. St. Louis Park Water Plant #8
9701 W. 16th Street
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
13. St. Louis Park Water Plant #10
6007 Cedar Lake Road
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
14. St. Louis Park Water Plant #16
2012 Flag Ave S
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
15. Sam’s Club #6318
3745 Louisiana Ave. S
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
16. Costco #377
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 88
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 10
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Oil & Hazardous Materials Response
Page I 19
5801 W. 16th Street
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
Facility Coordinators names and phone numbers are listed in the resource manual
Attachment 5
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 89
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 11
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Energy & Utilities
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Operations Director
Primary Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Public Works
Hennepin County Public Works
Support Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Management
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Hennepin County Municipal Public Works Departments
Electricity Service Providers (public and private)
Gas Utility Providers
Phone and Internet Service Providers
Wastewater Utility Providers
Water Utility Providers (public and private)
Regional Water Systems
State Resources: Minnesota State Duty Officer
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Minnesota National Guard
Minnesota Department of Public Safety
Office of Pipeline Safety
Federal Resources: Department of Energy
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex L. Public Works and Utilities
• Hennepin County EOP - Support Annex E. Energy
• Hennepin County EOP - Incident Annex J. Blackout, Electrical
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• Metro Region EMS Incident Response Plan
• Minnesota Fire Chiefs Intrastate Mutual Aid Plan
• A Chain of Command for Public Works
• A callout list for Public Works employees including the emergency equipment that
each employee is trained to operate
• A list of Agencies and City’s contractors / vendors capable of supplying operation
services and equipment
ESF 11 Energy & Utilities
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 90
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 11
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Energy & Utilities
Page I 2
• A list of governmental units participating in the Regional Mutual Aid Association
• A letter from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District offering funding to address a
declared emergency affecting the watershed
• Standard Operating Procedure for Wastewater Collection
• Standard Operating Procedure for Stormwater Collection
• Standard Operating Procedure for Water Production
• Standard Operating Procedure for Hazardous Spills
• Standard Operating Procedure for Traffic Signal Systems
• Standard Operating Procedure for Loss of Electric Power to City Buildings
• Standard Operating Procedure for Loss of Hard Line Phone Service to City
Buildings
• Standard Operating Procedure for Loss of Remote Site 2-Way Radio Transceiver
Operation
• Standard Operating Procedure for Equipment Procurement during Emergencies
• Water Contingency and Conservation Plan – Chapter 2
• Standard Operating Procedure for Debris Removal
Purpose
The purpose of ESF #12 is to coordinate the provision of temporary emergency power
(electrical, petroleum fuels etc) and the restoration of damaged energy and utilities
(electrical, natural gas, water, sewer, telecommunications etc) within the City of St. Louis
Park.
Scope
ESF #12 collects, evaluates, and shares information on energy system damage and
the impact of energy system outages within affected areas. Additionally, ESF #12
coordinates with providers on the energy restoration process. ESF #12 also provides
expertise to the utilities regarding the impacts and critical needs of government and the
affected private sector.
The term “energy” includes producing, refining, transporting, generating, transmitting,
conserving, building, distributing, maintaining, and controlling energy systems and
system components. All energy systems are considered critical infrastructure, however
most energy systems are not under the operation or control of governmental agencies
in the county.
For ESF-12 Energy and Utilities purposes, the following items are defined as:
Energy refers to the electricity, natural gas, and petroleum products usually
transmitted through utility systems;
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 91
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 11
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Energy & Utilities
Page I 3
Utilities refer to the comprehensive system which generates, transmits,
distributes, and maintains energy, water, wastewater, and communications for
public consumption.
Utility and energy disruptions can be a result of any of the hazards to which the city
is vulnerable.
ESF #12:
• Addresses significant disruptions in energy provision, whether caused by
physical disruption of energy transmission and distribution systems, unexpected
operational failure of such systems, or unusual economic or international political
events.
• Addresses the impact that damage to an energy system in one geographic
region may have on energy systems, and components in Hennepin County relying
on the same system. Energy supply and transportation problems can be
intrastate, interstate, and international.
• Performs coordination role for supporting the energy requirements associated
with large special events.
• Is the primary point of contact with the energy industry for information sharing
and requests for assistance.
• Maintains lists of energy-centric critical assets and infrastructures, and
periodically assesses those resources to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities to
energy facilities.
The Director of Operations or designee and the Emergency Operations Center will
coordinate the following government agencies and private sector organizations,
which are responsible for providing utility services for the City of St. Louis Park.
A. Electrical service – Xcel Energy
B. Gas service – Center Point Energy - Minnegasco
C. Telephone service - Qwest Telephone Company (Qwest)
D. Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer service - St. Louis Park Utilities
Division
E. Refuse collection – Waste Management Inc.
F. Cable service – Time Warner Cable
G. Data/Internet Access – St. Louis Park IT Division
Service Restoration:
Priorities for utility restoration will depend on the nature and location of the
incident. Vulnerable populations and facilities essential for public safety will be
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 92
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 11
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Energy & Utilities
Page I 4
considered first. In the event of a utility outage due to a disaster, the following
offices/agencies should be called in order to restore service:
A. Electrical service – See Resource Manual
B. Gas service – See Resource Manual
C. Telephone service - See Resource Manual
D. Water, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Sewer service - St. Louis Park Utilities at
(952) 924-2558; or 952-924-2559; or 952-924-2557
E. Refuse collection – Waste Management Inc. at (763) 783-5423
F. Cable service – Time Warner Cable at (612) 522-7700 or (612) 522-2000
G. Data/Internet Access – St. Louis Park TSS (952) 924-2189
- Backup: LOGIS (763) 543-2600
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex L. Public Works and Utilities
Purpose
This annex describes, in general terms, which agencies are responsible for the
restoration of utilities and critical public works following a disaster/emergency. For this
annex, the utilities of concern are: gas, electricity, propane, telephone, water, sanitation
treatment and wastewater collection/treatment/disposal. Critical public works include
freeways, roads, bridges, water and waste treatment plants, sewers, etc.
Policy
A. In most instances, the restoration of utility service lost/interrupted due to a disaster/
emergency will be the responsibility of the utility itself--whether it is privately or publicly
owned.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Public Works
Hennepin County Emergency
Management
3
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 93
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 11
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Energy & Utilities
Page I 5
B. If local governments believe that state government assistance is needed in a
utilities/public works restoration effort, they may contact the Hennepin County Emergency
Management to assist in that process
General
Restoration of utilities damaged as a result of a disaster is not a state government
responsibility. This responsibility normally belongs to one or more of the following:
a. Investor-owned utility companies: electric, natural gas and telephone.
b. Municipally owned and/or operated utilities: electric, natural gas, telephone and water/
wastewater.
c. Rural electric cooperatives: electric.
Support Annex E. Energy
Policy
The term “energy” includes producing, refining, transporting, generating, transmitting,
conserving, building, distributing, maintaining, and controlling energy systems and system
components. All energy systems are considered critical infrastructure.
Purpose
To facilitate multi-agency coordination response actions in the restoration process of
damaged energy systems in order to maintain continuous and reliable energy supplies.
To monitor the county energy, utility, electric, gas, water, waste water, and
tele/communications public services during and following a major disaster, such as a
tornado, winter storm, flooding, or other significant event requiring county assistance.
Scope
To collect, evaluate, and share information on energy system damage or disruptions and
provide Hennepin County partners and agencies estimations on the impact of those
system outages within the affected area.
Assumptions
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
HCEM
Private Sector Entities
Dept. of Public Works
Sheriff’s Office
Dept. of Natural Resources
12
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 94
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 11
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Energy & Utilities
Page I 6
,
• There may be widespread and possibly prolonged electric power failures.
• The transportation and telecommunications infrastructures may be affected.
• Local governments will be able to implement applicable portions of their own
emergency plans and procedures when needed to support the County in the
implementation of this annex.
• The energy suppliers and distributors will cooperate on a timely basis with the
requests for information and other efforts to implement this annex.
• Prolonged electric power failure will have a cascading effect on health care,
business, education, banking, and other important infrastructure.
• Generating capacity may fall below customer demand.
• The public expects restoration updates in order to prepare its families for
short or extended power outage event
• The loss of power will result in loss of heating/cooling, cooking, and
refrigeration resources for businesses and households.
•
Incident Annex J. Blackout, Electrical
Policy
• Municipal mutual aid agreements
• Power Company specific policies
Purpose
The purpose of Blackout, Electrical Annex is to provide a framework of coordination
among agencies to help ensure the safety of life and property during electrical blackouts
affecting Hennepin County. The primary focus on this annex is electrical blackouts and
the affect they could have on the safety and security of the population – economic and
business activity within the County.
Scope
Lead Department Supporting Department
Xcel Energy
Wright-Hennepin Electric
Minnesota Valley Electric
Cooperative
Hennepin County Property Services
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office
Hennepin County Public Works
Northern Minnesota Region, American Red Cross
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 95
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 11
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Energy & Utilities
Page I 7
Power resources (generation, transmission, and distribution) have become the most
important element of infrastructure in our economy. The interruption of power causes
immediate and widespread disruption of services to any community. Power failures or
blackouts range from a few hours to several days and occur along with other serious
disruptions, such as heat waves, extreme cold, windstorms, snow storms and other
severe weather phenomena. Resources can be stretched to the limit, degrading
response and recovery operations.
Assumptions
• Power failures and outages occur without warning;
• Restoration of electrical service leads to stabilization of emergency conditions;
• The higher the dependency on electrical power, will result in more required
resources
• All county equipment and personnel will be available to respond to the
emergency conditions;
• Assistance through mutual aid agreements is available.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Manager/ Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Operations Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 96
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 12
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Public Safety & Security
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Police Chief
Primary Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Police Department
Support Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Fire Department
Hennepin County Fire Departments
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Hennepin County Emergency Medical Services Agencies
Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office
Hennepin County Municipal Police Departments
State Resources: Minnesota State Patrol (MSP)
Minnesota State Duty Officer
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Minnesota National Guard (MNNG)
Federal Resources: Department of Justice (DOJ)
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• St. Louis Park Police Department Standard Operating Procedures
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex I. Evacuation and Security
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• Hennepin County Municipal Police Departments Standard Operating Procedures
• Metro Region EMS Incident Response Plan
• Minnesota Fire Chiefs Intrastate Mutual Aid Plan
Purpose
ESF #13 coordinate law enforcement and security capabilities and resources to
support the full range of incident management activities associated with potential
or actual incidents requiring a coordinated response.
Scope
ESF #13 provides a mechanism for coordinating and providing law enforcement
ESF 12 Public Safety & Security
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 97
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 12
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Public Safety & Security
Page I 2
and security support to the City of St. Louis Park during times of
emergency; and/or support to other ESFs, consisting of law enforcement and
security capabilities and resources during potential or actual incidents requiring a
coordinated response.
ESF #13 capabilities support incident management requirements including, but not
limited to, force and critical infrastructure protection, security planning and
technical assistance, technology support, and general law enforcement assistance
in both pre-incident and post-incident situations. ESF #13 is activated in situations
requiring extensive public safety and security and where the regular government
resources are overwhelmed or are inadequate.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex I. Evacuation and Security
Policy
The Hennepin County Sheriff’s office has developed a strategic plan that builds policy
within their department
Purpose
To keep and preserve the peace within the county, provide protection of life and property,
enforcement of laws, rules and ordinances, regulation and control of traffic, Federal, State
laws and local ordinances and rules, prevention of sabotage and subversive activity (and
to conduct explosive ordinance and hazardous materials reconnaissance), investigation
of causes of manmade disasters or domestic terrorism, and coordinate search and rescue
operations within Hennepin County.
Scope
The Sheriff’s Office is the primary provider of law enforcement services to various
communities within Hennepin County and provides law enforcement advice and
assistance to all county governmental offices and departments. Municipalities within the
county generally receive various levels of assistance from their own police department.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Sheriff
Municipal Law Enforcement
Federal Law Enforcement
9
13
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 98
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 12
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Public Safety & Security
Page I 3
The Sheriff‘s Office may provide assistance to local law enforcement agencies on a case-
by-case basis or by previously negotiated Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or
Mutual Aid Agreement requests.
Organization
Law enforcement services, law enforcement activities, crime scene processing, traffic
control and coordination of rescue activities will be carried out by the Sheriff's Office, and
such auxiliary services as deemed necessary, using the Incident Command System (ICS)
organization as standardized in Minnesota as NIMS.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Chief of Police/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 99
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 13
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: City of St. Louis Park Director of Inspections
Primary Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Operations City of St. Louis Park Assessors
City of St. Louis Park Controller
City of St. Louis Park Community Development
City of St. Louis Engineering Office
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Management
City of St. Louis Park Building Inspectors
Support Agencies: Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
MN VOAD
City of Minnetonka Building Inspectors
Hennepin County Public Works
Hennepin County Environmental Health
State Resources: Minnesota State Patrol
Minnesota State Duty Officer
Minnesota Department of Health
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Minnesota National Guard
Minnesota Department of Agriculture
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry
Federal Resources: Department of Agriculture
Department of Homeland Security
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Small Business Development
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• Minnesota State Statute 273.123
• City Declaration Template
• State Statutes Building Code, hazardous building section, environmental
• Hennepin County Environmental Health
• City Code Chapter 22
ESF 13 Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 100
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 13
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
Page I 2
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex D. Damage Assessment
• City of St. Louis Park Department Business Continuity Plans
• City of St. Louis Park Building Inspectors SOPs
• City of St. Louis Park Building Inspectors “Emergency Box”
• City of St. Louis Park Operations Standard Operating Procedures
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• Damage Assessment Standard Operating Procedures
• Preliminary Damage Assessment Field Guide
• Minnesota Disaster Management handbook: Guidance for Mitigation,
Preparedness, Response and Recovery
• Disaster Response and Recovery: A Handbook for Local Government. (Available
from the Emergency Manager or Homeland Security and Emergency
Management)
Purpose
This Emergency Support Function (ESF) is developed to outline the responsibility for
providing damage assessment. Specifically to provide an overview of how damage
assessment would be accomplished. An initial assessment of overall damage to public
and private property is required to provide a basis for:
A. The allocation of local and state resources for emergency operations in the
disaster area.
B. Based on information from City Staff, the City Council decides whether to
declare an emergency to exist in the City. City declares an emergency.
C. A County Declaration may or may not occur depending on damages, resources
needed and or overall damage assessed costs.
D. The Governor’s may or may not request to the president for emergency
assistance or to declare a major disaster when the magnitude of the damage
warrants such action.
Scope
Emergency Support Function #14 focuses on the business continuity activities that occur
within the operational units of the city.
This ESF will coordinate damage assessment activities of structures and or property
affected by a disaster. City of St. Louis Park Director of Inspections will be responsible
for the coordination of damage assessment within the City of St. Louis Park.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 101
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 13
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
Page I 3
For the purpose of this ESF, the following items are defined as:
Disaster Assessments: The process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting information
about the overall impact and damage caused by a disaster. The mission of the disaster
assessment function is to provide timely and accurate decision-making information for
disaster response and recovery operations.
Rapid Disaster Assessment: A rapid assessment is a quick evaluation of what has
happened and used to help prioritize response activities, allocate resources and
determine the immediate need for outside assistance. In most cases, a rapid
assessment will be completed within a few hours of the incident.
Detailed Disaster Assessment: After the rapid assessment, the disaster
assessment process evolves into a more detailed and continued evaluation of the
impacts of the disaster. The detailed damage assessment is needed to document the
magnitude of public and private damage for planning recovery activities and to
justify the need for State and Federal assistance. A detailed damage assessment is
also necessary to meet the information needs of the public, elected officials and the
media.
Structural Damage Assessments: As part of the detailed disaster assessment,
structural damage assessment is the process of collecting, analyzing, and reporting
information regarding public and private structures damaged by the disaster. This
information is necessary to support requests for future planning, response and recovery
programs offered at the state and federal levels.
Recovery: Recovery consists of the activities that continue beyond the emergency period
to restore critical community functions and manage reconstruction. The main goal of the
recovery process is to meet the needs of those affected by disaster. This ESF outlines the
framework of the recovery process and highlights the types of recovery assistance that
maybe available. Mitigation is only one of several responsibilities to consider during
recovery but it is very important to evaluate during the recovery process. Mitigation
consists of those activities designed to prevent or reduce losses from disaster.
The priorities of the damage assessment are to;
1. Determine if the structure and or property is “uninhabitable.”
2. Assign a value to the property
3. Determine the dollar loss of the property
The City Director of Inspections will determine that a structure is “uninhabitable”. Then it
will be properly posted and enforced by law enforcement. NEEDS COURT ORDER
• Green = Habitable
• Yellow = Limited Access
• Red = Denied Access
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 102
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 13
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
Page I 4
CIKR Damage (Engineering Director)
• Bridges
• Wastewater Treatment
• Lift Stations
The City of St. Louis Park Emergency Management will collect, organize and report
damage assessment information to the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Center
within 12 hours for the initial (rapid) damage report and a full report within 36 - 72 hours.
Damage Assessment Team
Organizational Chart
Damage Assessment Team Leader (Director of Inspections and Building Official)
• Compiles Aggregate Data
• Provides Property Value Data (City Assessor)
• Coordinates Process with Emergency Management Director
Public Damage (Operations Director) Property Identification (Engineering)
• Roads • Property Lines
• Sidewalks • Owner/Occupant
• Public Buildings • Addresses
• Map Development
Building Codes/Safety
(Planning/Zoning, CHS, Enviro. Services, Private Property Damage (Red Cross)
and City Building Officials) • Personal Belongings
Structural Integrity • Homes
• Water Quality - Engineering
• Sewer/Septic - ops
• Food/Sanitation – HC EH
Community Development
Responsibilities
A. The City Assessor is responsible for:
1. Developing, maintaining and coordinating a damage assessment “team” and
damage assessment process for determining the lost value of damaged
buildings and structures.
2. Maintaining a current listing of damage assessment team personnel.
3. Maintaining the procedure guidelines to be followed for damage assessment.
B. The Director of Inspections, and the Building Official is responsible for:
1. Developing, maintaining and coordinating a damage assessment “team”
for the purpose of determining the habitability and structural integrity of all
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 103
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 13
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
Page I 5
buildings or structures within the City.
2. Maintaining a current of damage assessment team personnel.
3. Maintaining the procedure guidelines to be followed for damage
assessment
4. Coordinating assistance from the Minnesota DOLI
5. Assisting as required the City Assessor with determining total lost value of
damaged buildings or structures.
C. Non-Profit and/or Private Sector Agencies
1. Red Cross – gather damage assessment information to provide a basis for
Red Cross assistance. Efforts should be made to integrate this process
with the City/County process to eliminate duplication of effort.
2. Realtors – provide value estimates of private property losses.
3. Hazardous Materials Clean-up Contractors – estimate cleanup/remediation
costs with environmental accidents.
4. Insurance Agents/Companies – may have data on properties insured or
uninsured.
D. City government officials who may participate in a damage assessment effort:
1. City Assessor
2. Community Development Director
3. Director of Operations
4. Director of Inspections
5. Chief Building Official
6. Director of Engineering
E. County government officials who may participate in a damage assessment
effort:
1. County Emergency Management
2. County Public Works/Engineer
3. County Assessor
4. County Social Services Director
5. County Environmental Health
6. County Public Health
Policies and Procedures
A. A damage assessment effort will be initiated as soon as practical following the
occurrence of a disaster.
B. Where possible and when appropriate, pictures will be taken of damaged
areas, and city maps will be used to show the location of damage sites.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 104
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 13
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
Page I 6
C. When damage assessment is carried out in conjunction with a request for state
or federal disaster assistance, the St. Louis Park emergency management
director will contact the county emergency management director, who will
coordinate with Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex D. Damage Assessment
Policy
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief Emergency Assistance Act
National Historic Preservation Act, Public Law 89-665
National Disaster Recovery Framework
CFR 44, Code of Federal Regulations
Post-Katrina Emergency management Reform Act
Minnesota Statute 273.123.
Purpose
This annex presents a system to coordinate damage assessment and reporting functions,
estimate the nature and extent of the damage, coordinate debris management, and
provide disaster recovery assistance.
Scope
The mission of County government during disaster recovery operations is to coordinate
and direct operations when local resources are exhausted and to coordinate assistance
from mutual aid resources, the State and the Federal government as necessary and
appropriate.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Emergency Management
Municipal Emergency
Management
County Assessor National Disaster
Recovery
Framework
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 105
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 13
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
Page I 7
This Annex should be used by County agencies, local governments and volunteer
organizations to develop Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and recovery annexes
in order to facilitate continuity and coordination of recovery activities.
Assumptions
• Substantial federal assistance will be needed, but not be limited to, public
assistance to reimburse government jurisdictions for disaster-related losses and
individual assistance to help individuals and small business with disaster-related
losses.
• The recovery process will take years and may not be able to bring the
communities in the county back to their pre-existing state prior to the disaster; a
“new normal” may be the recovery goal.
• Recovery is a complex process that includes special legislation, financial
entanglements, massive construction programs, and lawsuits.
• Long term recovery will involve different participants and stakeholders, including
the traditional first responder community that is primarily involved in the response
to a disaster.
• Comprehensive damage assessment evaluation is necessary to support
requests for recovery programs offered at the state and federal levels.
• The prompt and accurate assessment of damage to property during recovery will
be a top priority for local officials.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City of St. Louis Park Finance Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Assessor Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 106
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 13
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Damage Assessment & Long Term Recovery
Page I 8
City of St. Louis Park Director of Inspections Date
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 107
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 14
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Emergency Public Information
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: Communications & Marketing Coordinator
Primary Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Information Resources
Support Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Departments
Independent School District 283
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Minnesota Association of Government Communicators
American Red Cross PIOs
State Resources: Minnesota Department of Public Safety/PIO Staff
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• City of St. Louis Park Emergency Communications Resource
• City of St. Louis Park Standard Operating Procedures
• Hennepin County EOP - Functional Annex C. Public Information
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• NIMS Incident Command System Field Guide
Purpose
This Emergency Support Function # 15 (ESF) is developed to provide an overview of how
emergency public information would be gathered, checked for accuracy, and
disseminated in the event of a disaster.
Scope
Emergency Support Function #15 focuses on the public information activities that support
emergency operations throughout the City of St. Louis Park.
Policies and Procedures
ESF 14 Emergency Public Information
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 108
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 14
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Emergency Public Information
Page I 2
The Public Information Officer (PIO) gathers, verifies, coordinates and disseminates
accurate, accessible and timely information on the incident’s cause, size, and current
situation; resources committed; and other matters of general interest for both internal and
external use. All information in the field must be cleared by the Incident Commander or
Emergency Management Director. The primary official authorized to serve as the PIO is
the Communications & Marketing Coordinator. If the Communications & Marketing
Coordinator is unavailable, the Communications Specialist, the Emergency Preparedness
Director or Deputy City Manager may serve as the alternate PIO.
A. If it becomes necessary to establish a news briefing room, the Community
Room in City Hall would be used for this purpose. If this room is not available
or suitable to the situation, the PIO will select an alternate site. Any alternate
site must first be approved by the Emergency Management Director,
Emergency Management Coordinator or Incident Commander. Equipment
needed at this site may include: computer, printer, paper, pens, maps, bulletin
board, and network/phone access (if operational) for cable and computers.
B. Upcoming briefing times will be posted via the city website, social media and
email or other communication methods.
In the event of a major disaster, access to the briefing room will also be
provided to cable television, telephone, gas and power company
representatives or other providers of basic services.
C. In any emergency, information will be provided to the news media in a timely
manner as deemed appropriate by the PIO working in concert with the
Emergency Management Director, Emergency Management Corrdinator or
Incident Commander.
D. In order to gather information in a timely manner, the PIO and Communications
Specialist will be given access to all sites, personnel and information as
deemed appropriate by the Emergency Coordinator.
E. The PIO or Communications Specialist will write all information that is to be
released to the public via the cable television, news media, social media or the
city website. Before releasing information, the PIO will have information
checked for accuracy by the Incident Commander or appropriate source. Only
confirmed information will be released.
F. When it is time to release information, the spokesperson will be the Emergency
Management Director. If the Emergency Management Director deems it
appropriate, he/she may delegate this duty to the PIO, Communications
Specialist or other designee.
G. Public information will be disseminated through any available media or
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 109
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 14
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Emergency Public Information
Page I 3
communication resource as appropriate to the situation and the needs of the
City and the public, including the city websites, web - based applications, social
media, ParkAlert citizen notification system and the media.
H. In the event of a major disaster, the city will utilize the Emergency Mode of the
city website to quickly disseminate important information to the public. The
Emergency Management Director, Emergency Management Coordinator or
Incident Commander may direct the Technology & Web Coordinator, PIO or
Communications Specialist to place the city website into Emergency Mode.
I. The PIO or Communications Specialist may use the ParkAlert Citizen
Notification System to disseminate information to the public as approved by the
Emergency Director.
J. In the event of a major or prolonged disaster, the PIO may ask communications
personnel from neighboring cities or school districts to assist with the
preparation of information.
K. In the event of a major disaster, the PIO may, with the permission of the
Emergency Management Director or Emergency Coordinator, set up a Citizen
Information Center to handle rumors, answer public calls, locate missing
persons, etc. The Center would be staffed by City employees or community
volunteers. The PIO or his/her designee will provide information to the people
staffing the Center. Only confirmed information will be released.
L. In the event of a major disaster, the PIO may, with the permission of the
Emergency Management Director or Emergency Coordinator, select someone
to provide assistance to visiting dignitaries.
M. If it appears that the city may need to document a request for disaster aid, the
PIO or his/her designee will collect audio, photo and video documentation of
damage from City staff and the public; the city’s Information Resources staff
may be assigned to capture specific video or photographs of damage.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Functional Annex C. Public Information
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 110
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 14
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Emergency Public Information
Page I 4
Purpose
To provide information to the public in the event of emergencies such as; natural
disasters, civil disturbances, terrorist attacks, and health risks.
Scope
Official emergency information will be released to all appropriate news media in the
designated media area within Hennepin County, and posted in the county website:
www.hennepin.us for media and the public.
Organization
The Public Affairs Director will serve as the Public Information Officer (PIO). Public Affairs
Department staff and additional staff appointed by the PIO will perform duties as
assigned. Additional support positions will be assigned dependent upon the situation
and may include Assistant PIO, On-Site PIO, EOC PIO, Joint Public Information Officer
(JPIC) PIO, JPIC Coordinator, and Administrative Support Team members.
Control
A. General
The Public Affairs Office will be the JPIC coordinator and control of all Public
Affairs related actions will originate from there.
In the event of a situation involving multiple jurisdictions, a JPIC may be activated
at the Emergency Operations Center. All local, state and federal agencies (and in
some cases private sector agencies and businesses) involved in responding to the
disaster will be asked to provide a spokesperson. Alternate sites may be used
based on the scope of the disaster.
B. Line of succession is as follows:
1. Public Affairs Director
2. Public Affairs Deputy Director
3. On-site Public Information Officer
Responsibilities
A. General
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Hennepin County
Public Affairs
Hennepin County Emergency
Management
15
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 111
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 14
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Emergency Public Information
Page I 5
The responsibility for handling public affairs for emergency operations is that of the
Hennepin County Public Affairs Department.
B. County EOC Ac tiva tion
The nature and extent of the catastrophe will determine if representation is required
on a continuing basis at the EOC or if an on-call status is sufficient at the time.
C. PIO
The PIO is responsible for all emergency public information planning and
operations, and counsels and provides special communication skills to county
emergency government authority. The PIO will coordinate public information
activities between departments and with Hennepin County municipalities, higher
levels of emergency government and the news media. The PIO has immediate
access to all information and may review all public information materials prior to
release.
D. Assistant PIO
The Assistant PIO is in charge of public inquiries and rumor control functions.
E. On-Site PIO
The On-Site PIO will conduct briefings at the site of the disaster as needed,
gathering information available from the Incident Commander.
F. Contact List
A list of media contacts (call letters, names of stations and newspapers, addresses,
telephone numbers and email addresses) is on file in the Public Affairs Office.
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Communications & Marketing Coordinator Date
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 112
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 15
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Technology Business Continuity
Page I 1
City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
ESF Coordinator: Chief Information Officer
Primary Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Information Resources
Support Agencies: City of St. Louis Park Departments
Technology / Web Coordinator
Senior IT Analyst
GIS Coordinator
City Manager/Emergency Manager
Fire Chief/Emergency Coordinator
Police Chief/Emergency Coordinator
City Clerk
Independent School District 283
Hennepin County Emergency Management
Hennepin County Chief Information Officer
Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office
Hennepin County Public Works Department
Hennepin County Assessor’s Office
Hennepin County Department of Transportation
LOGIS
Software Application Vendors
Hardware Vendors
Network Vendors
Fiber Maintenance Providers
UHL Security
Integra Telecom
Verizon Communications
Sprint / Nextel
T-Mobile
AT&T
CenturyLink Communications
MCI
Xcel Energy
CenterPoint Energy
Comcast Cable
Canadian Pacific Railroad
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad
Twin City & Western Railroad
ESF 15 Technology Business Continuity
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 113
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 15
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Technology Business Continuity
Page I 2
State Resources: Minnesota Department of Public Safety
Minnesota Homeland Security and Emergency Management
Minnesota All Hazards Incident Management Team III
Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension
Minnesota Fire Marshal’s Office
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Minnesota Office of Enterprise Technology (MN.IT)
References
The following are a list of reference documents for this ESF
• City of St. Louis Park Standard Operating Procedures
• Hennepin County Support Annex J. Critical Infrastructure
• Minnesota Emergency Operations Plan
• US PATRIOT Act of 2001 (42 U.S.C. 5195c (e)), section 1016(e)
• Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101(9)), section 2(9)
• Homeland Security Presidential Directive-7
Purpose
This Emergency Support Function # 15 (ESF) is developed to provide a high level
citywide Technology Business Continuity Program. It focuses on identifying and
implementing technology requirements and technical solutions for essential city business
services.
Scope
Emergency Support Function #15 focuses on the following goals:
Business continuity solutions for technology required to support Emergency Support
Functions as they pertain to the Emergency Operations Plan for disaster and emergency
situations.
Business continuity solutions for maintaining City essential business services requiring
access to technology-related infrastructure including: computerized information
applications, hardware, and networks; wired and wireless telephone services; radio
systems; cable TV; Internet services; and building access and security.
Business continuity solutions for maintaining City essential business services requiring
access to vital records (as coordinated by the City Clerk)
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 114
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 15
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Technology Business Continuity
Page I 3
Addressing technology business continuity in non-City operations throughout the
community as resources allow.
Policies and Procedures
The Chief Information Officer is responsible for:
• Developing, maintaining, and coordinating a technology business continuity “team”
and assessment process.
• Maintaining a current listing of technology business continuity team personnel.
• Maintaining procedure guidelines to be followed for technology business continuity
related to essential City services.
• Maintaining procedure guidelines to be followed for technology support related to
emergency support functions.
• Maintaining procedure guidelines to be followed for technology support related to
non-City operations in the community.
• Coordinating with other segments of the community to ensure technology business
continuity related to essential community (individual / public / private / non-profit)
services (e.g., trained community Emergency Management volunteers, healthcare
facilities, local shelters, schools, other critical Emergency Management resources).
Policies and Procedures:
• An assessment of the interruption to technology business continuity will be initiated
as soon as practical following the occurrence of a disaster.
• An assessment of technical needs of the Emergency Support Functions will be
initiated as soon as practical following the occurrence of a disaster.
• Triage essential business needs and emergency support functions.
• Initiate recovery of services and functions per triage.
• Restore services and functions per triage.
• Reconstitute government services and emergency support functions.
• Resume normal business operations and emergency response.
• Staff, the public, and others will be notified as appropriate to the situation.
• Where possible, diagrams, maps, GIS resources, cameras, and other technology
documentation will be used to identify the physical and virtual location(s) of the
sources and effects of the disaster.
• The primary EOC, backup EOC, Mobile Command Vehicle, and other facilities will
be activated with technology as appropriate to maintaining business continuity.
• When mitigation is carried out in conjunction with a request for State or Federal
assistance, the Emergency Coordinator will contact the County Emergency
Management Director, who will coordinate with the Minnesota Department of
Emergency Management.
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 115
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 15
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Technology Business Continuity
Page I 4
• When necessary, city government officials will carry out mitigation activities in
conjunction with LOGIS, utilities, fiber maintenance providers, and other agencies.
• When possible, the Emergency Coordinator and other appropriate government and
agency officials will participate in technology business continuity procedure training.
Hennepin County EOP
For further information at the County level which this plan falls under please
reference the Hennepin County Emergency Operations Plan
Support Annex J. Critical Infrastructure
Policy
US PATRIOT Act of 2001 (42 U.S.C. 5195c (e)), section 1016(e)
Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101(9)), section 2(9)
Homeland Security Presidential Directive-7
The county and municipalities within the county will identify, prioritize, and coordinate the
protection of critical infrastructure and key resources in order to prevent, deter, and
mitigate the effects of deliberate efforts to destroy, incapacitate, or exploit them. The
county will work with state and local governments and the private sector to accomplish
this objective.
Purpose
To identify and prioritize county critical infrastructure and key resources by developing
protection measures in the event of a catastrophic event. Critical infrastructure and key
resources provide the essential services that underpin our society. Critical infrastructure
are the assets, systems, and networks, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the county
that their incapacitation or destruction would have a debilitating effect on security,
economic security, public health or safety, or any combination thereof. The County
possesses numerous key resources, whose exploitation or destruction could pose
significant damage or incapacitation to our economy and its population.
Scope
Review CIKR data, collect data inventories, assess risks, and identify appropriate
response posture for CIKR elements and resources in the event of an incident.
Lead Department Supporting Department ESF
Municipal EM Hennepin County 2, 3, 12
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 116
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 15
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Technology Business Continuity
Page I 5
Assumptions
• Affected sectors of CIKR may have a cascade of failure affecting other
infrastructure
• All networks, systems, communities, and departments have plans in place to
protect its infrastructure
• Recovery from a significant event can take weeks or months
• All Public and Private sector collaboration is essential: Security, IT, Banking etc…
• Immediate funding will be available to assist in rebuilding
Responsibilities
A. The County remains available to work with businesses and communities to prepare
and recover from whatever they are faced with. The infrastructure of the county
can be aligned to the national Infrastructure sectors they include:
• Agriculture and Food
• Banking and Finance
• Communications
• Defense
• Emergency Services
• Fire Departments
• Law Enforcement
• Monuments and Icons
• Municipal Services
• Power
• Public Works
• Transportation
B. Local governments are responsible for emergency services and first-level
responses to CIKR incidents. In some sectors, local governments own and
operate CIKR such as water, wastewater, and storm water systems or electric
utilities, and are responsible for initial prevention, response, recovery, and
emergency services provision.
C. Private-sector CIKR owner/operators are responsible at the corporate and
individual facility levels for risk and incident management planning, security, and
preparedness investments.
D. Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) is developed by three major questions
1. What is critical?
2. Is it vulnerable?
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 117
City of St. Louis Park ESF - 15
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Technology Business Continuity
Page I 6
3. What can be done?
Authentication
City of St. Louis Park Communications & Marketing Coordinator Date
City of St. Louis Park Manager/Emergency Management Director Date
City of St. Louis Park Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Date
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8b)
Title: City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan Page 118
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 4, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Denial of Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License - Thien’s, Inc., dba St. Louis Park
Liquor
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution of written findings denying an off
sale intoxicating liquor license to Thien’s, Inc. dba St. Louis Park Liquor for premises located at
6316 Minnetonka Boulevard.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the findings of fact and reasons
for denying the application from Thien’s, Inc. dba St. Louis Park Liquor for an off-sale
intoxicating liquor license?
SUMMARY: The City received an application from Thien’s Inc., dba St. Louis Park Liquor,
for an Off-Sale Liquor License for the premises located at 6316 Minnetonka Boulevard, an
existing off-sale liquor establishment. Thien Van Tran, who previously served as the manager at
the existing business, was attempting to purchase the business to become the sole owner.
The Police Department conducted a full background investigation. Several concerns were noted
in the findings of the investigation, including this applicant’s history of liquor violations related
to selling alcohol to a minor, including one conviction within the last five (5) years.
Due to the nature of the violations, and with 2013 being the most recent incident, staff felt the
applicant did not meet the requirements for approval of a liquor license pursuant to City
Code Sec. 3-70 and M.S. 340A.402. Staff subsequently met with the applicant to discuss the
findings of the investigation. The applicant was informed that staff would recommend denial of
the liquor license based on the findings of the investigation.
Following a public hearing on April 20, 2015, the City Council denied the application of Thien’s
Inc. dba St. Louis Park Liquor for an off-sale intoxicating liquor license for the premises located
at 6316 Minnetonka Boulevard. The decision to deny the application was based on the facts that
the applicant’s liquor violations had a direct relationship to the sale of alcohol within the City
and were willful violations of both state law and the local ordinance governing the sale of
alcoholic beverages. Additionally, the applicant failed to provide the Council with evidence of
sufficient rehabilitation and fitness to perform the duties of a licensee. The City Council directed
the city attorney to prepare a resolution detailing the written findings of fact and reasons for
denial of the application. The attached resolution is presented as formal documentation of the
findings of fact and reasons for denial of the liquor license.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, HR Director/Deputy City Manager
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 2
Title: Denial of Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Thien’s Inc. dba St. Louis Park Liquor
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION DENYING APPLICATION FOR
OFF SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE
WHEREAS; Thien’s, Inc., dba St. Louis Park Liquor (hereinafter “Thien’s”), submitted
an application for an Off--Sale Liquor License for the premises located at 6316 Minnetonka
Boulevard. Thien Van Tran is the sole owner of Thien’s;
WHEREAS; Minnesota Statute Chapter 340A and St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3
include provisions addressing a person’s eligibility for liquor licenses, application and
background investigation requirements, and related notice and hearing requirements;
WHEREAS; Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.402 provides that “no new retail license
may be issued to . . . a person who, within five years of the license application, has been
convicted of a felony or a willful violation of a federal or state law or local ordinance governing
the manufacture, sale, distribution, or possession for sale or distribution of an alcoholic
beverage;”
WHEREAS; St. Louis Park City Code Section 3-70(a)(7) provides that no license shall
be issued to or held by any person who “ [w]ithin five years of the license application, has been
convicted of a felony or a willful violation of a federal or state law or local ordinance governing
the manufacture, sale, distribution or possession for sale or distribution of an alcoholic beverage,
and who cannot show competent evidence under M.S.A. § 364.03 of sufficient rehabilitation and
present fitness to perform the duties of a licensee;”
WHEREAS; following a criminal background investigation and review of the
application submitted by the applicant, a public hearing was held on April 20, 2015, pursuant to
public notice in accordance with City Ordinance;
WHEREAS; Mr. Van Tran previously served as the manager at the existing business on
the application site, and a criminal background check revealed convictions for selling alcohol to
a minor, in 2005, 2008, and 2013, with one of these convictions occurring within the last five (5)
years;
WHEREAS; the City Police Department and Licensing staff have reviewed and
investigated the liquor license application and have recommended denial of the application,
based on their findings ; and;
WHEREAS; Thien’s provided no competent evidence for the Council’s consideration
which would indicate sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of a
licensee with respect to Mr. Van Tran;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that the application from Thien’s for an Off-Sale Liquor License for the
premises located at 6316 Minnetonka Boulevard is hereby denied for the following reasons:
City Council Meeting of May 4, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 3
Title: Denial of Off-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Thien’s Inc. dba St. Louis Park Liquor
1. Mr. Van Tran, the manager named by Thien’s, has a history of liquor violations related to
selling alcohol to minors in the metro area and in St. Louis Park. The most recent violation
occurred in 2013. These convictions have a direct relationship to the sale of alcohol within
the City and to Mr. Van Tran’s fitness as a license holder.
2. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.402, Mr. Van Tran is ineligible for a liquor
license because he willfully violated a state law and local ordinance governing the sale of
an alcoholic beverage within the last five (5) years.
3. Applicant provided no competent evidence to the Council of sufficient rehabilitation and
present fitness to perform the duties of a licensee, with respect to Mr. Van Tran.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that pursuant to St. Louis Park City Code Section 3-
65(b) and Minnesota Statutes Section 364.05, Mr. Van Tran is hereby notified that he may
reapply for a liquor license from the City when he is no longer subject to the five-year
ineligibility provision of Minnesota Statutes Section 340A.402, that all competent evidence of
rehabilitation will be considered upon reapplication and that state law provides a complaint and
grievance procedure of the City Council’s decision as set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section
364.06;
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk