HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015/05/18 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
MAY 18, 2015
(Mayor Jacobs Out)
6:30 p.m. CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Item
1. 40 min. Closed Session to Discuss the Acquisition of 40th Street & France Avenue
Property
7:20 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes May 4, 2015
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
6. Old Business – None
7. New Business
7a. Authorization to Submit Applications for Environmental Grant Funds from Hennepin
County ERF, DEED Cleanup, and Metropolitan Council TBRA Programs Related to
The Shoreham Project
Recommended Action:
• Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution supporting the submission of a grant application
for the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED)
Contamination Clean-up Grant Program on behalf of The Shoreham project;
• Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution supporting the submission of a grant application
for the Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Grant Program on behalf of The
Shoreham project;
• Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution supporting the submission of a grant application
for the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Program on behalf of The
Shoreham project.
7b. Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary
Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE.
8. Communications -- None
9. Adjournment
Meeting of May 18, 2015
City Council Agenda
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Retirement Recognition for City Attorney Tom Scott
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Special Study Session Meeting May 4, 2015
3b. City Council Meeting May 4, 2015
3c. Study Session Meeting May 11, 2015
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
6a. Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
Recommended Action: Mayor to open the public hearing, solicit comments and close
the public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Consenting to the Issuance of Health
Care Revenue Refunding Bonds to Refinance Health Care Facilities Located in the City.
6b. The Shoreham - Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Right-of-Way
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve First
Reading of an Ordinance vacating right-of-way and set the Second Reading of
Ordinance for June 1, 2015.
6c. Westside Center – Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Vacating Public
Easements
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve First Reading
of the Ordinance Vacating Utility Easements and Reestablishment of a Property Line
Easement and set Second Reading for June 1st, 2015.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public -- None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to
Breweries
Recommended Action: Motion to approve the first reading of an Ordinance amending
City Code Sec. 3-57 to increase the maximum number of barrels of malt liquor able to
be produced annually, and an Ordinance amending Business Park and Industrial Park
Zoning Districts pertaining to breweries, and to set the second reading for June 1, 2015.
Meeting of May 18, 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.
8b. Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary/Final
Plat of Minnota Addition.
8c. The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Recommended Action:
• Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary and Final Plat, with
Subdivision Variance, of The Shoreham Addition with conditions.
• Motion to approve First Reading of the Ordinance creating Section 36-268-PUD 1
and amending the Zoning Map from C-2 General Commercial and R-4 Multiple
Family Residence to PUD 1 for properties at: 3907 and 3915 Highway 7, 3031
Glenhurst Avenue, and 3914 and 3918 31st Street West to PUD and to set the
Second Reading of Ordinance for June 1, 2015.
8d. 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Recommended Action:
• Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary Plat with Subdivision
Variances for Park Commons West, subject to conditions.
• Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary PUD for properties at 4760
and 4900 Excelsior Blvd, subject to conditions.
8e. First Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Pertaining to Discontinuance of Water
Service
Recommended Action: Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance amending
Chapter 32, Sec. 32-35 and Sec. 32-39 of the St. Louis Park City Code pertaining to the
Discontinuance of Water Service, and to set the second reading for June 1, 2015.
9. Communications -- None
Meeting of May 18, 2015
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary Development Agreement between the
EDA, the City, and PLACE.
4b. Approve the second reading and Adopt Ordinance amending the zoning ordinance
relating to yards, parking, and screening requirements; and authorize summary
publication.
4c. Approve the acquisition of the “13th Lane” and “Texas Avenue” properties currently
owned by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) and to sell the
properties to Melrose Development, LLC and enter into a purchase agreement with the
same.
4d. Adopt Resolution establishing certain Municipal State Aid Street segments and a
resolution revoking certain Municipal State Aid Street segments.
4e. Adopt Resolution to recognize Public Service Worker David Vann for his 33 years of
service to the City of St. Louis Park.
4f. Approve for filing Environment and Sustainability – Sustainable SLP Meeting
Minutes April 7, 2015
4g. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes April 15, 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: Closed Executive Session
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Closed Session to Discuss the Acquisition of 40th Street & France Avenue Property
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable at this time.
SUMMARY: For some time now the cities of St. Louis Park and Edina have been discussing
with the City of Minneapolis the purchase of the Minneapolis owned property on the west side
of France Ave at 40th St. The site is approximately 15 acres in size with one third located in St.
Louis Park and two thirds in Edina. Written offers have been exchanged between the cities with
the most recent coming from Minneapolis.
The City Attorney and staff desire to discuss with the City Council a potential offer back to
Minneapolis. Attached is the May 4, 2015 letter from the City of Minneapolis regarding this
property.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to be a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business; St Louis Park is committed to providing a well maintained and diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Letter to Tom Harmening from City of Minneapolis (5/4/15)
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Closed Executive Session Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 1) Title: Closed Session to Discuss the Acquisition of 40th Street & France Avenue PropertyPage 2
Closed Executive Session Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 1) Title: Closed Session to Discuss the Acquisition of 40th Street & France Avenue PropertyPage 3
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 4, 2015
1. Call to Order
President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:25 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Anne Mavity, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Jeff Jacobs, Gregg
Lindberg, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Commissioners absent: None.
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 20, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to accept for
filing EDA Disbursements for the period March 28, 2015, through April 24, 2015.
The motion passed 7-0.
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business
7a. Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract – Central Park West,
LLC, and RISLP, LLC (TPI Hospitality). Resolution No. 15-06.
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and explained that two weeks ago the EDA and City
Council approved an Assignment and Assumption of the Redevelopment Contract for the
Phase III hotel property at The West End between Central Park West, LLC (CPW) and
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2015
Regalia Suites, LLC. He stated that subsequent to that meeting, staff was informed that
CPW has chosen to convey the Phase III property to RISLP, LLC, an affiliate of TPI
Hospitality, the owner of the Hilton Homewood Suites. He advised that under the
proposed Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract, RISLP, LLC,
assumes all financial obligations incurred by CPW under the Redevelopment Contract
related to Phase III.
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-06 Approving an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment
Contract between Central Park West, LLC, and RISLP, LLC.
The motion passed 7-0.
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
President Mavity adjourned the meeting at 7:28 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Secretary President
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 7a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Authorization to Submit Applications for Environmental Grant Funds from Hennepin
County ERF, DEED Cleanup, and Metropolitan Council TBRA Programs Related to
The Shoreham Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
• Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution supporting the submission of a grant application for the
Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) Contamination Clean-up
Grant Program on behalf of The Shoreham project;
• Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution supporting the submission of a grant application for the
Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Grant Program on behalf of The Shoreham
project;
• Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution supporting the submission of a grant application for the
Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Program on behalf of The Shoreham project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support the submittal of grant applications to
assist in the environmental clean-up associated with Bader Development’s proposed mixed-use
redevelopment at the SW corner of CSAH 25 and France Ave?
SUMMARY: Bader Development has agreements to acquire 5 properties at the SW corner of
CSAH 25 and France Ave and intends to redevelop the block into a mixed-use building that
includes 150 residential units, and 20,000 square feet of general office and medical office uses.
During its investigation of the subject site, Bader Development discovered the soil is impacted
with contamination that will need to be removed prior to redevelopment. A total of $1.4 million
in grants have been applied for from Hennepin County, DEED and Metropolitan Council to
assist with the cleanup costs. Each grant requires a resolution from the governing body of the
city where the project site is located indicating that it supports the project.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: It is required that the DEED applicant or
other local source pay for 25 percent of the project cost as a local match to obtain a cleanup
grant. Of this local match, the applicant must pay an amount equal to 12 percent of the cleanup
costs from the municipality’s general fund, a property tax levy or other unrestricted money
available to the municipality. This 12 percent cannot include funds from other grant sources.
The Developer has agreed to pay this cost however it plans to include this and other costs in its
application for TIF assistance from the EDA. No additional funds are being requested from the
EDA 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
Resolutions
Prepared by: Julie Grove, Economic Development Specialist
Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, EDA Deputy Executive Director and Deputy City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Resolutions Supporting Bader Development Application for Clean Up Grants for The Shoreham Project
DISCUSSION
Background:
Bader Development has requested a Preliminary and Final Plat and a Preliminary and Final
Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the properties at 3907 & 3915 Highway 7, 3031 Glenhurst
Avenue, and 3914 & 3918 31st Street West. The Developer proposes to remove the current
commercial buildings and residences along with the contaminated soil and fill material impacting
the site, and construct a mixed-use development called The Shoreham. The proposed building
would consist of 150 residential units (of which 20% would be designated for households
earning 50% of area median income) and 20,000 square feet of office space (split between Bader
Development/Steven Scott Management and a medical office tenant). Also included would be
structured underground and surface parking. The proposed building would front on CSAH 25
and be five stories tall, with the second through fifth story stepped back from the street. The
building would be three stories tall facing W 31st Street, with the building being built into the
hillside.
As part of its site due diligence, a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted in
September 2014. Subsequently several other environmental investigations were conducted
including Environmental Subsurface Investigation, Asbestos, Lead, and Regulated Materials
Survey, Supplemental Site Investigation, and Development Response Action Plan/Construction
Contingency Plan.
These investigations revealed that soil on the site is impacted with petroleum, lead, pesticides
and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Also impacting the soil is various fill debris
including glass, brick, ash, concrete, wood and asphalt which varies in thickness from 3 feet
(south side) to as deep as 15 feet (north side). Groundwater below the site is also impacted with
petroleum compounds.
The northern and western portions of the site were historically marshy areas as evidenced by the
layers of peat identified in the soil borings completed on the site. In the 1940s and 1950s, it
appears that these areas were contaminated due to urban fill material and debris deposited on the
north side of the site. In addition there is evidence of underground storage tanks and timber piles
associated with former buildings on the site.
During redevelopment, the site will be excavated to depths ranging from 10 to 20 feet below
grade to construct one level of underground parking beneath the new building. Therefore, it is
anticipated that significant amounts of impacted fill soil will be excavated and will necessitate
special handling and disposal in accordance with MPCA guidance documents.
Grant Assistance:
The estimated cost to clean up the subject site is in excess of $1.9 million dollars. The
Developer is seeking contamination cleanup grants totaling more than $1.4 million through the
Metropolitan Council, Hennepin County and the DEED. Cleanup grants are intended for
applicants to assist with the cost of implementing a cleanup plan and begin redevelopment. They
are awarded on a competitive basis to redevelopment projects that will start within three years of
receiving the grant award. All three entities require an authorizing resolution from the governing
body of the city where the project site is located indicating that the city is supportive of the
project. Grant awards are typically announced in July.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Resolutions Supporting Bader Development Application for Clean Up Grants for The Shoreham Project
It should be noted that in November Bader Development applied for a $499,000 Transit Oriented
Development grant from Hennepin County for public improvements with this project including:
pedestrian and bike improvements including sidewalks, bike parking and bike racks, a bike
repair station, showers for commuters, landscape improvements at pedestrian connections, site
lighting for the pedestrian way, pedestrian plaza, and pedestrian amenities. Last week, Hennepin
County informed Bader that this grant was awarded.
Construction of The Shoreham is anticipated to begin in late summer 2015 with a goal of having
residents move in during fall of 2016. It is projected that the number of jobs created after
development of this site will include 45 new full-time medical positions, 10 new full-time on-site
property management positions and 43 full-time jobs will be retained for Bader Development’s
headquarters.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: Resolutions Supporting Bader Development Application for Clean Up Grants for The Shoreham Project
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVING LOCAL
MATCHING FUNDS ON BEHALF OF THE SHOREHAM
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has agreed to act as
the legal sponsor for the Project referred to as The Shoreham, contained in the Contamination
Cleanup Grant application submitted to the Department of Employment and Economic
Development (DEED) on or before May 1, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has the legal authority
to apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to
ensure adequate project administration; and
WHEREAS, the sources and amounts of the local match identified in the application are
committed to the project identified and the advance of such funds is subject to the final approval
of the Economic Development Authority; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has not violated any
Federal, State or local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of
interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice; and
WHEREAS, upon approval of its application by the state, the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above
referenced Project, and that the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority certifies that it
will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in all contract agreements;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the President and Executive Director
are hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Employment and Economic Development
for funding of this project on behalf of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and
execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the Project on behalf of the applicant.
I CERTIFY THAT the above resolution was adopted by the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority on, May 18, 2015.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority, May 18, 2015
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Title: Resolutions Supporting Bader Development Application for Clean Up Grants for The Shoreham Project
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR THE
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL TAX BASE REVITALIZATION ACCOUNT
ON BEHALF OF THE SHOREHAM
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is a participant in the Livable Communities Act's
Housing Incentives Program for 2015 as determined by the Metropolitan Council, and is
therefore eligible to make application for funds under the Tax Base Revitalization Account; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has identified
a clean-up project within the City that meets the Tax Base Revitalization account's purposes and
criteria; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has the
institutional, managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority certifies that it
will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the contract agreements; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority agrees to act
as legal sponsor for the project contained in the Tax Base Revitalization Account grant
application submitted on May 1, 2015;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the President and Executive Director
are hereby authorized to apply to the Metropolitan Council for a Tax Base Revitalization
Account grant on behalf of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and to execute
such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority , May 18, 2015
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 6
Title: Resolutions Supporting Bader Development Application for Clean Up Grants for The Shoreham Project
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR A GRANT FROM
HENNEPIN COUNTY’S ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND
ON BEHALF OF THE SHOREHAM
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority is eligible to make
application for grant funds from Hennepin County’s Environmental Response Fund; and
WHEREAS, the grant funds will be used for environmental clean-up of The Shoreham
site located at 3907 & 3915 Highway 7, 3031 Glenhurst Ave., and 3914 & 3918 31st St W in the
City of St. Louis Park; and
WHEREAS, the State Statute which created the Environmental Response Fund requires
approval by the governing body of the EDA for submission of a grant request to the Hennepin
County Environmental Response Fund; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority has the institutional,
managerial and financial capability to ensure adequate project administration for any grant funds
received; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority certifies that it will
comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the contract agreements; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority agrees to act as legal
sponsor for the project contained in the Environmental Response Fund grant application to be
submitted on or before May 1, 2015;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority supports The Shoreham project, for which an Environmental Response
Fund grant application is being submitted for program eligible activities, and that the President
and Executive Director are hereby authorized to apply to Hennepin County for an Environmental
Response Fund grant on behalf of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority on or
before May 1, 2015 and execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on
behalf of the applicant.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority, May 18, 2015
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 7b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary
Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA/City Council support the proposed Preliminary
Development Agreement with PLACE to formalize the respective parties’ obligations relative to
further defining a mixed-use development at 5725, 5925 and 5815 Highway 7?
SUMMARY: Last fall, the City was awarded a $100,000 Metropolitan Council Livable
Communities Pre-Development Grant for a prospective PLACE development at 5725, 5925 and
5815 Highway 7 (“site”). Grant activities included design work and preparation of market studies
and financial pro forma in connection with the potential project.
At the November 3, 2014 Special Study Session, the EDA reaffirmed its interest in seeing the
PLACE redevelopment project proceed on the former McGarvey Coffee property and the EDA
and City-owned properties to the west. The EDA also directed Staff to secure the former
McGarvey property so as to pursue a mixed-use development on the site similar to the one
PLACE was proposing. On February 2nd the EDA approved a Purchase Agreement and on
February 20th the EDA closed on the property.
Given the above actions, the appropriate next step is to enter into a Preliminary Development
Agreement between the EDA, the City and PLACE. The purpose of which is to formalize the
respective parties’ obligations under the Metropolitan Council grant agreement as well as their
respective responsibilities relative to further defining the project consistent with the parties’
mutual objectives. PLACE also needs formal permission to access the property in order to
conduct its due diligence. Further included in the agreement is an outline for applying for land
use and zoning changes as well as tax increment financing. During the term of the agreement it is
proposed that PLACE be provided with exclusive rights to negotiate acquisition of the subject
properties with the EDA and the City. This is to provide PLACE’s potential funders with assurance
of its ability to secure the subject properties for the proposed development. The Agreement would
terminate if the EDA/City have not approved a formal Redevelopment Contract by February 29,
2016 or sooner by mutual agreement (this is a minor revision from the previous staff report). Staff,
in consultation with the EDA’s legal counsel, prepared the attached Preliminary Development
Agreement which is recommended for approval.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: When appropriate, PLACE expects to
submit an application for TIF assistance.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Preliminary Development Agreement
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, EDA Deputy Executive Director and Deputy City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7b) Page 2
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
APPROVING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, THE
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, AND PLACE
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority (“Authority”) as follows:
1. Background.
1.01. The Authority and the City of St. Louis Park (the “City”) own certain property (the
“Property”) in the City, which Property has been the subject of certain preliminary negotiations with
PLACE (the “Developer”) for purposes of constructing a mixed-use (multi-family residential and
commercial), mixed-income development on the Property and related parking, incorporating
renewable energy sources including an anaerobic digester (the “Development”).
1.02. The Authority, the City and the Developer have determined to enter into a
preliminary development agreement (the “PDA”), providing for negotiation of a definitive
development contract that will address (among other things) terms under which the Developer will
construct the Development on the Property, and the Authority may provide certain financial
assistance if warranted to make development by the Developer financially feasible.
1.03. The Board has reviewed the PDA, and has determined that it is in the best interests
of the Authority to approve and execute the PDA.
2. Approval of PDA.
2.01. The Authority approves the PDA, and authorizes and directs the President and
Executive Director to execute same in substantially the form on file, subject to modifications that do
not alter the substance of the transaction and are approved by the President and Executive Director,
provided that execution of the PDA by such officials will be conclusive evidence of their approval.
2.02. Authority officials and consultants are authorized to take any other actions necessary
to carry out the Authority’s obligations under the PDA, and to bring a proposed definitive
development contract before the Authority.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority May 18, 2015
Executive Director President
Attest:
Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7b) Page 3
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”), dated May 18,
2015, by and between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body
corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Authority”), the City of St.
Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”), and PLACE, a Minnesota nonprofit
corporation (the “Developer”);
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority and the City desire to promote development of certain property
within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”) in the City, located at 5725, 5925 and 5815
Highway 7 (the “City and Authority Property”) and 3520 Yosemite Avenue (the “Rail Property”
and together with the City and Authority Property, the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Property is made up of four parcels, of which the City and Authority
Property is owned by the City or the Authority, and the Rail Property is owned by the Hennepin
County Regional Rail Authority; and
WHEREAS, the City and Authority have determined that it is in the best interests of the
City that the Developer be designated as the sole developer of the City and Authority Property
during the term of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City has entered into a grant agreement with the Metropolitan Council to
fund pre-development activities by the Developer in connection with the Developer’s desire to
develop the City and Authority Property (the “Grant Agreement”, and with any future grant
agreements awarded to the City in relation to the City and Authority Property, the “Grant
Agreements”); and
WHEREAS, the Developer desires to acquire the City and Authority Property for purposes
of constructing a mixed-use (multi-family residential and commercial), mixed-income development
on the City and Authority Property incorporating renewable energy sources, including an
anaerobic digester and related parking (the “Development”) , a proposed site plan for which is
attached as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested the Authority and City to explore the use of tax
increment financing under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended (the “Tax
Increment Act”) or other public financial assistance to offset a portion of the public costs of the
Development; and
WHEREAS, the Authority, the City and the Developer are willing and desirous to undertake
the Development if (i) a satisfactory agreement can be reached regarding the City’s and/or
Authority's commitment for public costs necessary for the Development; (ii) satisfactory mortgage
and equity financing, or adequate cash resources, for the Development can be secured by
Developer; (iii) the parties reach a satisfactory resolution of zoning, land use, public infrastructure,
and site design issues; and (iv) the economic feasibility and soundness of the Development and
other necessary preconditions have been determined to the satisfaction of the parties; and
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7b) Page 4
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into this Agreement setting forth their respective
responsibilities in connection with the Property.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and
obligations set forth herein, the Authority, the City and the Developer hereby agree as follows:
1. During the term of this agreement, the Authority and the City agree to negotiate solely with
the Developer relative to the acquisition and development of the City and Authority Property by the
Developer.
2. The parties agree to work cooperatively towards defining the Development and its
components (including but not limited to site design, building plans and specifications, number of
market-rate and affordable residential units, commercial square footage, building stories and height,
sustainable and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) components and structured parking,
stormwater management, streets and sidewalks, and all other necessary public infrastructure
improvements), determining its financial feasibility, the infrastructure necessary to service it, and
the approvals necessary to bring it to fruition, as well as to negotiate in good faith toward a
definitive Purchase and Redevelopment Contract (the “Contract”) and a related planning
development contract regarding the Development.
3. Developer shall prepare a project pro forma (including a detailed list of various revenue
sources and respective amounts necessary to bring the Development to fruition) and submit it to the
Authority for its review.
4. Developer shall work to secure satisfactory mortgage and equity financing, and additional
forms of financing necessary to bring the Development to fruition.
5. Developer understands the Development will be subject to the City’s Green Building Policy
adopted February 16, 2010, as amended, and agrees to abide by its requirements if the parties enter
into the Contract.
6. In connection with this Agreement, the City and Authority hereby grant to the Developer, its
agents, employees, officers, and contractors (the “Authorized Parties”) a right of entry on the City
and Authority Property for the purpose of performing all due diligence work and inspections
deemed necessary by the Developer to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement (the “Permitted
Activities”). The Authorized Parties shall have access to the City and Authority Property seven (7)
days a week between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Developer hereby agrees to be
responsible for any and all costs related to the Permitted Activities conducted on the City and
Authority Property, and to restore the City and Authority Property to its original condition upon
completion of the Permitted Activities. Developer agrees to indemnify, save harmless, and defend
the City, the Authority, and their officers and employees, from and against any and all claims,
actions, damages, liability and expense in connection with personal injury and/or damage to the City
and Authority Property arising from or out of any occurrence in, upon or at the City and Authority
Property caused by the act or omission of the Authorized Parties in conducting the Permitted
Activities on the City and Authority Property, except (a) to the extent caused by the negligence,
gross negligence, willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct by the City or
Authority, their officers, employees, agents or contractors; and (b) to the extent caused by a “Pre-
Existing Condition” as defined in this paragraph 6. “Pre-Existing Condition” shall mean any
condition caused by the existence of hazardous substances or materials in, on, or under the City and
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7b) Page 5
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
Authority Property, including without limitation hazardous substances released or discharged into
the drainage systems, soils, groundwater, waters or atmosphere, which condition existed as of the
date of this Agreement and became known or was otherwise disclosed or discovered by reason of
the Authorized Parties’ entry onto the City and Authority Property.
7. The City will determine the municipal regulatory approvals required for the Development
including, but not limited to, land use amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, zoning changes,
permits, and any other necessary municipal approvals.
8. The City agrees to provide guidance to the Developer on its applications for any approvals
or land use guidance and zoning changes as may be required in connection with the Development.
However, the City makes no guarantees as to any approvals or land use guidance and zoning
changes as may be required in connection with the Development.
9. The City will review existing traffic studies pertinent to the Development and undertake any
additional traffic studies deemed necessary by the City in its sole discretion, and the Developer
agrees to place sufficient funds in escrow to pay for any such studies, upon request by the City.
10. The Developer agrees to complete an Application for Tax Increment Finance Assistance
(the “Application”), and pay the required application fee to the Authority.
11. The Authority agrees to direct its staff and legal and financial consultants to review and
analyze the Application and the Development’s pro forma and help determine the terms of tax
increment or other financial assistance required for the Development.
12. The Authority agrees to undertake an analysis to determine the feasibility of creating a tax
increment financing district in connection with the Development and Property, and Developer
agrees to place sufficient funds in escrow to pay for any such analysis. The Developer will
cooperate with the Authority’s review and analysis, and provide to the Authority all documents and
information requested by the Authority in connection with that effort.
13. If, in the Authority’s sole discretion, the Development is feasible and public financial
assistance is indicated, the Authority, the City, and the Developer will negotiate towards a definitive
Contract providing generally for (a) purchase of the Property by the Developer; (b) pay-as-you-go
tax increment assistance in an amount determined by the Authority to be necessary to make the
Development financially feasible; (c) disbursement of grant proceeds under the Grant Agreements
to Developer for stated activities in accordance with the Grant Agreements; and (d) timely
construction of the Development by Developer. Any definitive Contract is subject to approval by
the Authority’s board of commissioners. It is expressly understood that the Contract, when
executed, will supersede this Agreement in all respects. Execution and implementation of the
Contract shall be subject to:
(a) A determination by the Authority in its sole discretion that its undertakings
are feasible based on (i) the projected tax increment revenues and any other revenues
designated by the Authority or City, including Grants; (ii) the purposes and objectives of
any tax increment, development, or other plan created or proposed for the purpose of
providing financial assistance for the Development; and (iii) the best interests of the City
and Authority.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7b) Page 6
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
(b) A determination by the Authority that any financial assistance is reasonably
necessary in order to make the Development financially feasible, and that any such
assistance is limited to the amount necessary to achieve financial feasibility based on
Developer’s pro forma and review of all the facts and circumstances.
(c) A determination by the Developer that the Development is both market and
economically feasible and in the best interests of the Developer, and that the Developer is
able to meet all the requirements of the Contract and of the Grants under the Grant
Agreements.
14. The Developer will reimburse the Authority for all out-of-pocket costs incurred by the
Authority in connection with review and analysis of the Development. Such costs include fees paid
to attorneys, the Authority’s financial advisor, and any planning and engineering consultants
retained by the Authority in connection with review of the Development. The Developer must pay
such costs to the Authority within 10 days after receipt of a written invoice from the Authority
describing the amount and nature of the costs to be reimbursed.
15. TheThis Agreement may be terminated (a) by the Developer may at any time terminate this
Agreement upon 10 day’s written notice to the Authority; (b) by mutual written agreement of all
parties hereto; or (c) pursuant to paragraph 17 hereof. Upon such termination, no party shall have
any further obligations to the others under this Agreement, except that Developer remains obligated
to pay any costs payable under paragraph 13 that were incurred by the Authority before the effective
date of termination.
16. In expansion and not in limitation of paragraph 14 hereof, Developer agrees to notify the
Authority and City and to terminate this Agreement as soon as reasonably practicable if the
Developer determines that the proposed Development is not market and economically feasible
and/or Developer is unable to secure the financing necessary for the Development, or if the
Developer for any reason is unable to bring the Development to fruition.
17. This Agreement shall terminate by its terms if the governing bodies of the Authority and
City have not approved the Contract by December 31, 2015.February 29, 2016. Upon such
termination, the Developer remains obligated to pay any costs payable under paragraph 13 that were
incurred by the Authority and the City prior to such date.
17.18. Notice or demand or other communication between or among the parties shall be
sufficiently given if sent by mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or delivered personally:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7b) Page 7
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
(a) As to the City:
City of St. Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
(b) As to the Authority:
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
(c) As to the Developer:
PLACE
100 Portland Ave. South
Minneapolis, MN 55401
18.19. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, all
of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
19.20. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of Minnesota. Any disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of this Agreement shall
be heard in the state or federal courts of Minnesota, and all parties to this Agreement waive any
objection to the jurisdiction of these courts, whether based on convenience or otherwise.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 7b) Page 8
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Authority have caused this Agreement to be duly
executed in their name and behalf and their seal to be duly affixed hereto and the Developer has
caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the date and year first above written.
PLACE ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By:
Its ______________________________ Its President
Its Executive Director
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Its Mayor
Its City Manager
EXHIBIT A
Description of PropertyEXHIBIT B
458659v5 MNI SA285-104
Site Plan
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Presentation: 2a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Retirement Recognition for City Attorney Tom Scott
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recognize Tom Scott and present him with a plaque in honor of
his 19 years of outstanding service to the City of St. Louis Park.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: City Attorney Tom Scott will be in attendance for the presentation at the
beginning of the meeting. The Mayor is asked to present Mr. Scott with a plaque in recognition
of his 19 years of service as the City Attorney.
Tom graduated from the University of Minnesota in 1974 and graduated from William Mitchell
College of Law in 1978. He began his career as an attorney in private practice at the South St.
Paul law firm of Grannis & Grannis. In 1986 he co-founded the firm Campbell, Scott & Fuchs,
which later became Campbell Knutson.
Tom has served as the City Attorney for St. Louis Park since 1996 and provided outstanding
service to the City throughout his tenure. He spent his career practicing law in the areas of
municipal law, eminent domain, land use, appellate law and commercial litigation and has
defended numerous cities and other governmental entities as assigned counsel for the League of
Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. Tom has personally briefed and argued approximately 50
appellate court cases, including matters before the Minnesota Supreme Court and the Eighth
Circuit Court of Appeals. Tom has represented the City with the utmost integrity and provided
expert guidance in city matters.
Tom is a very active person who enjoys traveling, spending time at his cabin, and volunteering in
his community. He is looking forward to retirement and the opportunity to spend more time with
his grandchildren.
City staff would like to thank Tom for his valuable contributions and years of dedicated service
to the City of St. Louis Park and wish him the best in his retirement.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None.
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 4, 2015
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs (arrived 7:06 p.m.), Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin,
Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano (arrived at 6:37 p.m.).
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Director of Operations
and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Public Works Services Manager (Mr. Merkley), Solid Waste
Program Coordinator (Ms. Fisher), Public Works Superintendent (Mr. Hanson), and Recording
Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Polystyrene/Plastic Bag Update
Ms. Fisher presented the staff report and discussed the City’s education campaign to increase
participation in the organics program, including the use of yard signs promoting the program by
current participants. She advised that staff will present an update in June to the Environment &
Sustainability Commission regarding polystyrene (PS) and single-use plastic bag initiatives. She
discussed next steps and stated that the City Attorney has indicated that the City has the legal
authority to regulate PS and single-use plastic bags and will need to make sure any ordinance is
tied to a legitimate governmental purpose. She stated staff is also tracking the City of
Minneapolis’ ordinance related to PS and has reviewed sample ordinances from around the
nation; in addition, staff has been surveying cities that have banned single-use plastic bags. She
stated the proposed timeline includes a presentation in June by a panel of industry experts
followed by a robust public information process in July and August and a study session
discussion in September to discuss the recommended policy implementation process.
Councilmember Mavity stated she was comfortable with the proposed next steps and timeline.
She asked about a recent statement by Hennepin County that referenced a 42% increase in
organics recycling that appeared to indicate the increase was attributable to St. Louis Park. She
stated she would like to know if there was any data available corroborating that statement and if
the statement is true, the City should acknowledge and celebrate this increase.
Councilmember Spano indicated a recent tweet by Hennepin County Commissioner Greene
thanked St. Louis Park for increasing organics by 42%. He stated he was fine with the proposed
next steps and timeline, but wanted to set a higher target for increasing organics participation by
June 2016 because he felt the City could do better. He did not agree with charging a fee for
paper bags and stated if the idea is to incent the use of more biodegradable materials, he did not
want to charge a fee for using a biodegradable material and suggested offering a discount if a
customer brings in their own bag.
Councilmember Sanger stated her previous suggestion about charging a fee was related to a fee
for using a plastic bag and not a paper bag. She did not think there could be a 100% ban on all
plastic bags in all circumstances and there may need to be some exceptions where there is no
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Special Study Session Minutes of May 4, 2015
other alternative, e.g., the plastic bags used for newspaper delivery, and she felt the proposed ban
on plastic bags should be targeted to retail establishments. She noted that the proposed PS ban
includes an exception for containers that are recyclable, compostable, or reusable, and felt that
the exception for reusable containers was in the eye of the beholder and those containers still end
up in the waste stream and suggested removing the word “reusable.” She stated the PS ban
should also apply to grocery stores that offer takeout. She stated she was fine with the proposed
next steps and timeline but was concerned that the proposed industry experts’ panel would be
one-sided and felt that technical experts from an environmental organization should be invited to
provide a balanced panel and suggested contacting the Sierra Club or a similar organization.
Councilmember Sanger stated that one of the obstacles to participating in the organics program
has to do with the fact that not all residents have room for a large container and requested that
staff see if there are alternatives available. She stated the City of Minneapolis does not charge
extra for organics recycling and has built the cost of the program into its rate structure so it is not
punitive to those choosing to participate and asked staff to review the City’s rate structure.
It was the consensus of the City Council to support a future study session discussion regarding
the rate structure for the organics program.
Ms. Fisher stated that ordinances in other cities are limited to single-use plastic bags used in
retail, such as grocery stores, and ban the use of plastic bags given out at the point of sale.
Councilmember Lindberg stated he appreciated the systematic approach being taken but
questioned whether sufficient time has been allotted for the public input process. He stated that
one of Council’s defining goals is being an environmental leader and felt the process lacked
strategic direction, including goals and outcomes so that Council can measure its progress on
being an environmental leader.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen agreed with the suggestion regarding the industry expert panel. He
stated he wanted to make sure any ban on the use of single-use plastic bags was extended to gas
stations and other places that use a lot of plastic bags. He requested further information about
the 2016 mandate on recycling for businesses and multi-family housing.
Ms. Fisher explained that the State mandate requires certain businesses provide the opportunity
to recycle at least three broad material categories including paper, plastic, metal, and glass, and
can include organics.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen urged the City to promote organics recycling at restaurants and fast
food establishments.
Ms. Fisher stated the City intends to promote organics recycling at restaurants and fast food
businesses and noted that Hennepin County has targeted their outreach to businesses that qualify
as high generators, e.g., restaurants.
Mayor Jacobs arrived at 7:06 p.m. and presided over the remainder of the meeting.
Councilmember Sanger asked if the City could adopt an ordinance that requires businesses and
multi-family housing to recycle more than three types of materials.
Mr. Scott agreed to follow-up on Councilmember Sanger’s question.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Special Study Session Minutes of May 4, 2015
Councilmember Lindberg stated he would like further information about compliance efforts from
a data and staff perspective.
Councilmember Sanger stated the PS ban is aimed at takeout food and would like to see the ban
extended to items that are packaged in PS by the manufacturer, e.g., egg cartons. Mr. Scott
responded that this may raise interstate commerce concerns.
Councilmember Brausen stated he would like the PS ban extended to Styrofoam cups as well.
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 7:16 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 4, 2015
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Ms. Deno), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Fire Chief (Mr. Koering), Director of
Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Community Development Intern (Ms.
Mardell), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors Introduction & Recap of Year
Mayor Jacobs stated this year’s Parktacular is scheduled for June 19-21 and further
information is available at www.parktacular.org.
Ms. Maggie Myers, co-director of Parktacular, stated the ambassadors attended 18
parades and approximately 30 events last year and also served on various projects
including handing out medals at the Special Olympics and painting fire hydrants. The St.
Louis Park Parktacular ambassadors introduced themselves.
Mayor Jacobs thanked all of the ambassadors for representing the community and for
their service throughout the year.
2b. Recognition of Donation
Mayor Jacobs expressed the City Council’s thanks and appreciation to Celeste Hill for
the $200 donation for a barred owl mount for Westwood Hills Nature Center.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting April 13, 2015
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2015
Councilmember Mavity requested that the last sentence of the eighth paragraph on page 3
be revised to state “She stated she would like to see what strategies could be implemented
to address the need to continue increasing capacity and reducing use.”
The minutes were approved as amended.
3b. Special Study Session Meeting April 20, 2015
Councilmember Lindberg requested that the third sentence of the tenth paragraph on page
2 be revised to state “He added that the City had twice the per capita rate of off sale
liquor licenses than Edina Minneapolis 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 Spano requested that the fifth paragraph on page 3 be revised by adding
a sentence that states “He indicated that small businesses create more jobs than big box
businesses and create greater tax revenue for the community.”
The minutes were approved as amended.
3c. City Council Meeting April 20, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented.
3d. Study Session Meeting April 27, 2015
Councilmember Sanger requested that the ninth paragraph on page 2 be revised to state
“Councilmember Sanger stated that the proposed building looked like a lot of other
apartment buildings in the City and did not include distinctive architecture. She was
troubled by the lack of green space around the building and was also troubled by the fact
that the City was counting nearby on-street parking spaces toward the developer’s
required number of parking spaces because those on-street spaces are already heavily
used by customers of the existing Excelsior & Grand businesses.”
Councilmember Hallfin requested that the seventh paragraph on page 2 be revised to state
“Councilmember Hallfin stated he did not understand why the City put together task
forces to come up with design guidelines and the City never seems to hold the developer
to those design guidelines. He 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.”
The minutes were approved as amended.
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.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2015
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 No. 15-059 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
No. 15-060 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 No. 15-061 revising stop sign at Walker
Street and W. 37th Street.
4f. Moved to 8d.
4g. Adopt Resolution No. 15-063 Authorizing 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. Moved to 8e.
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 No. 15-064 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.
Mr. Harmening stated that a resident requested that Consent Calendar item 4f be removed
and placed on the Regular Agenda.
Councilmember Lindberg requested that Consent Calendar item 4i be removed and
placed on the Regular Agenda.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to
approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar as amended to move
Consent Calendar items 4f and 4i to the Regular Agenda as items 8d and 8e; and to
waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Boards and Commissions - None
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2015
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
Ms. Mardell presented the staff report and stated that the minimum width of a side yard
abutting a street is 15’ and the amendment decreases the width to 5’ in the C-1 and C-2
districts. She stated the amendment requires buildings of three or more stories in the C-1
district to set stories above the second floor back by at least 10’ from the front and side
property line abutting a street. She stated the amendment reduces the minimum drive
aisle widths from 25’ to 24’ in all districts and the amendment reduces the minimum
parking lot aisle width from 25’ to 22’ and when a drive aisle is less than 24’, the parking
stall minimum width has been increased to 9’. She stated the Design Guidelines
recommend prohibiting parking in front of a building to promote parking in the rear or
side yard in all C-1 districts. She stated that in order to further define and enhance the
buffer zone between commercial and residential properties, the Design Guidelines
recommend increasing the height of screen fences from 6’ to 8’ in all C-1 properties and
also requiring parking lots be set back 8’ when adjacent to residential properties.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to approve
First Reading of Ordinance Amending Chapter 36 of the St. Louis Park City Code
Creating a Planned Unit Development Zoning District and to set Second Reading for
May 18, 2015.
The motion passed 7-0.
8b. City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan
Mr. Koering presented the staff report and 2015 Emergency Operations Plan. He stated
the Emergency Operations Plan represents a year’s worth of collaborative effort across all
departments and was discussed at length with the City Council. He advised that the
Emergency Operations Plan outlines 15 Emergency Support Functions and guides and
directs the command and resources during an actual event.
Councilmember Sanger commended Mr. Koering for all of his work on the Emergency
Operations Plan.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to adopt
the 2015 City of St. Louis Park Emergency Operations Plan as presented.
The motion passed 7-0.
8c. Denial of Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License – Thien’s, Inc., dba St. Louis
Park Liquor. Resolution No. 15-065.
Ms. Deno presented the staff report and advised that following the full background
investigation by the Police Department and discussions with the applicant, the denial of
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2015
the off-sale intoxicating liquor license is based on several violations of selling alcohol to
a minor, including one conviction in the last five years. She stated the City received no
other information from the applicant about rehabilitation and fitness to perform the duties
of a licensee, and the resolution details the written findings of fact and reasons for denial
of the application.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-065 Denying Application for Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor License.
The motion passed 7-0.
8d. Resolution Authorizing Installation of “No Parking” Restrictions on Toledo
Avenue from Wooddale Avenue to 125 feet South of Wooddale Avenue.
Resolution No. 15-062.
Ms. Heiser presented the staff report and stated the parking restrictions are being
implemented in response to a petition from residents in the 4000 block of Toledo Avenue
South.
Mr. Harvey Meyer, 4044 Toledo Avenue, expressed safety concerns about the area and
stated when Wooddale Flats is opened, there will be more residents and visitors in the
area and that might make for some poor sightlines coming in and out of Wooddale Flats.
He stated that since the start of construction on Wooddale Flats, construction workers
have been parking in front of his house and he wondered if residents and visitors of
Wooddale Flats would use the parking spot in front of his house.
Ms. Heiser stated the Wooddale Flats property was previously a school and had no
parking along Wooddale Avenue because it was a school drop-off area. She advised that
staff has discussed the possibility of instituting a public process about having Wooddale
Avenue become a parking area for residents and visitors and will bring this matter to
Council once construction on Wooddale Flats is completed, adding there have been a lot
of concerns about parking in this area and if it becomes an issue after Wooddale Flats is
open, the City can extend the no parking zone around the curb.
Mr. Harmening noted the City could institute permit parking for residents in this area to
address the parking concerns.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to adopt
Resolution No. 15-062 Authorizing Installation of “No Parking” – Restrictions on
Toledo Avenue from Wooddale Avenue to 125 Feet South of Wooddale Avenue – Traffic
Study No. 653.
The motion passed 7-0.
8e. 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants
Councilmember Lindberg requested that Council have a future study session discussion
about increasing the grant funding to the neighborhood associations and considering
opportunities for seed money for new neighborhood associations.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3b) Page 6
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2015
It was the consensus of the City Council to have a future study session discussion about
the grant funding made available to neighborhood associations.
It was moved by Councilmember Lindberg, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to
approve the 2015/2016 Neighborhood Grants.
The motion passed 7-0.
9. Communications
Mayor Jacobs announced the Ice Cream Social on Sunday, May 17th at Wolfe Park. He
also announced several events planned for Arbor Day and the Community Tree Planting
on Saturday, May 9th, at Bass Lake Preserve from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. He thanked
Comcast and all the volunteers who participated in the recent Comcast Cares Day.
Mr. Harmening thanked the homeowners who opened up their homes for the 10th home
remodeling tour held last weekend.
10. Adjournment
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 8:08 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Minutes: 3c
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 11, 2015
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manage r (Mr. Harmening), Director of Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Director of
Inspections (Mr. Hoffman), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Senior Planner (Mr.
Walther), Associate Planner (Mr. Kelley), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt),
Housing Supervisor (Ms. Schnitker), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guest: Mr. Chris Velasco (Place).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – May 18 & 26, 2015
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed special study session agenda for May 18th and the
proposed study session agenda for May 26th.
Councilmember Sanger referenced the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission 2015 Work
Plan and noted there was no mention of working on keeping the park restrooms open or
increasing recycling efforts in the parks.
It was the consensus of the City Council to request that the Parks & Recreation Advisory
Commission add these items to their 2015 Work Plan.
2. Place Concept Plan and Preliminary Development Agreement
Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report and introduced Mr. Chris Velasco, President of Place.
Mr. Kelley presented the proposed concept plan elements that include 200 affordable units at
60% AMI and 100 market rate units, as well as an E-Generation component of 15,000 square
feet that includes the digester, and other commercial and retail space, structured parking, and
green space.
Mr. Velasco presented an axonometric diagram of the site and described key components of the
site and noted that the buildings are higher in order to accommodate all the planned components
on the site. He stated they feel that the increased height of the buildings would work at this
location and there would be no shadowing issues and the increased height allows them to include
a one-acre green space on the site. He added they are currently doing a feasibility study on
whether to include a hotel as part of the project.
Councilmember Hallfin asked what entity would ultimately own this land and asked if property
taxes would be payable.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3c) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 11, 2015
Mr. Velasco replied that Place would be the nonprofit owner of the site and will pay property
taxes. He added that Stantec is also a partner/owner, Shaw Lundquist is the general contractor
and also a partner/owner, and architect Garth Rockcastle is an owner.
Councilmember Sanger supported the environmental and sustainability emphasis contained in
the project and also liked that the project includes three and four bedroom units and also agreed
with the analysis that this location could support taller buildings. She felt the 60% affordable
units was too high and would not support it. She asked how much of the TIF request is
attributable to the creation of affordable units. She also requested information about the size of
the units and rental rates and questioned whether there was sufficient parking available. She
asked if Place would move forward with the project even if the Wooddale station and/or light rail
is not built and asked if the project would move forward if the Xenwood underpass is not built.
Mr. Velasco replied that Place intends to go through with the project even in the absence of the
Wooddale station but would change the configuration of the site and not have a hotel. He added
that Place would continue with the project in the absence of the Xenwood underpass as well.
Councilmember Brausen stated he was excited about the project and supported the affordability
mix and wondered if there might be room for some units at 50% AMI or 40% AMI. He felt
there was adequate parking planned for the site especially given the proximity of the train
station. He also spoke in favor of the environmentally sustainable concepts planned in the
project and the urban forest.
Councilmember Mavity stated she continues to be enthusiastic about this project. She referenced
a statement in the staff report indicating that the EDA previously directed staff to secure the
McGarvey property on behalf of Place and clarified for the record that her vote was not intended
on behalf of Place but rather to secure the property in order to have a cohesive vision for the
entire site. She spoke in favor of the green aspects and felt the mix of units was exactly what
Council has been asking for. She questioned who the controlling partners would be and stated
she was willing to give direction to staff to move forward with the Development Agreement but
was worried about tying up the project for too long if the developer does not have the capacity to
make all these partners come together. She requested an update about the neighborhood process.
Mr. Hunt advised that the Development Agreement would be in place through the end of the year
and can be extended by mutual request if the parties choose.
Mr. Velasco stated the next step includes the neighborhood input process and advised it is their
intent to engage the public in the broadest possible sense.
Councilmember Mavity stated she wanted to make sure that the developer is not being given
direction to have a bland building that looks like every other building and to make sure the City
is doing its part to ensure this is a project with more “Wow” factor.
Councilmember Spano supported moving forward with the Development Agreement. He agreed
with Councilmember Mavity’s comments about the design of the building and was okay with the
increased height. He stated this is a unique project and it will be important to find the right
hotelier for this site and one that is not averse to some risk. He added he was concerned about all
the traffic in this area.
Councilmember Hallfin pointed out that Council has previously made statements about building
materials on various projects and felt that if Council does not like what it is seeing on these
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3c) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 11, 2015
projects then Council needs to change the City Code, adding that developers are building their
projects based on current City Code. He supported the affordability component, was happy to
see a hotel planned for the site, and was okay with the increased height of the buildings.
Councilmember Sanger requested further information about the partnership structure.
Mr. Velasco advised that Place never sells any of their projects and they are long-term stewards
of everything they create in order to maintain the highest ideals. He added that Place would not
manage the hotel but would own the hotel.
Councilmember Sanger stated she has been receiving a significant number of phone calls and
emails from residents who are concerned that the City has too much going on at one time,
especially too many apartment projects, and many residents have asked for a City-wide town hall
meeting about this issue.
Councilmember Lindberg spoke in favor of the project and stated he would like to have a
conversation about what the City might look like in ten or fifteen years if there is a drastic swing
in the housing market.
It was the consensus of the City Council to pursue the development plan proposed by Place. It
was also the consensus of the City Council to consider the Preliminary Development Agreement
at an upcoming EDA and City Council meeting.
3. The Shoreham (formerly Encore) Development
Mr. Kelley presented the staff report and advised that the City of Minneapolis has informed City
staff it would not support connecting France Avenue to West 31st Street in the Minneapolis
ROW due to the concerns of Minneapolis property owners regarding traffic and the adjacent
property owner’s long-term interest in asking the City of Minneapolis to vacate their ROW so
they can use it for redevelopment. He discussed three reconstruction options and indicated that
staff recommends pursuing Option #3 as further explained in the staff report.
Councilmember Sanger stated that all of the feedback she has received does not support
connecting France Avenue and noted that residents are supportive of connecting this area by
multi-use trail. She felt it was meaningless to connect up to West 31st Street and there was
nothing to be gained by the connection and her preference and the preference of residents was to
not make this connection to West 31st Street and rather connect the area with a multi-use trail.
It was the consensus of the City Council to not support the connection of France Avenue to West
31st Street.
4. Southwest LRT Update
Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report and stated that the most significant cost-cutting
measure impacting St. Louis Park is the CP rail swap, which would mean the SPO would not
have to build the southerly connector and would keep the switching wye with access to all
stations on the north side. Louisiana Avenue station would be on the berm that the rail bed is on.
Councilmember Mavity stated it was her understanding that in order to have the trains use the
switching wye, these trains will travel over and back up across Wooddale Avenue and it will be
necessary to keep the double tracks at Wooddale to accommodate the switching. Ms.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3c) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 11, 2015
McMonigal concurred. Mavity stated that it was a deal breaker for her in terms of safety and
congestion.
Councilmember Sanger agreed with Councilmember Mavity and stated the City should expect to
receive questions from the community about what the deletion of the CP rail swap means in
terms of a possible reroute. Council Members indicated it did not re-raise the question of reroute,
and Mr. Harmening pointed out that the railroad has not agreed to the “S” curve movement and
that is why the railroad refused the reroute.
Council continued its discussion regarding options for reducing costs of the Southwest LRT
project.
Councilmember Spano discussed the recent CMC meeting and items being considered by the
SPO for cutting the project budget.
Mr. Harmening acknowledged Council’s concerns about the impact of deleting the CP rail swap
from the standpoint of functionality and impacts of freight rail on Wooddale Avenue and the
Wooddale Avenue station.
Councilmember Lindberg asked if municipal consent would again be required.
Councilmember Spano stated that Mark Fuhrmann explained to the CMC that a substantial
alteration to the route or stations would trigger the need for municipal consent in the affected city
and Mr. Fuhrmann described any substantial derivation in horizontal or vertical alignment or
removal or relocation of a station as triggering another municipal consent vote.
5. Renewable Energy Power Purchasing Agreement
Mr. Hoffman presented the staff report and explained that Xcel Energy has launched a
community solar garden program to increase production of renewable energy and allows
subscribers to purchase renewable energy and receive an energy rebate. He stated that
community solar garden developers have expressed an interest in the City and there would be no
initial cost to the City.
It was the consensus of the City Council to support the use of renewable solar electrical energy
through a power purchasing agreement to offset a portion of the electrical consumption of the
City’s operations. It was also the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to proceed with
developing a Request for Proposal for a renewable energy power purchasing agreement.
6. Update on T.H. 100 Traffic Issues (Verbal)
Ms. Heiser advised that most complaints received by City staff have to do with traffic cutting
through the neighborhoods and stated that the City has stepped up speed enforcement activities
and has been rotating speed boards in the neighborhoods. She stated Mn/DOT has adjusted the
signal timing at Ottawa and Minnetonka Boulevard and Ottawa and Highway 7 and 25 as well as
at Louisiana Avenue to address backups and the City has added temporary stop signs at 27th and
Toledo and 27th and Raleigh as well as at 28th and Quentin and 28th and Raleigh.
Councilmember Spano expressed concern about the frontage road entrance at Barry in the
mornings.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 3c) Page 5
Title: Study Session Minutes of May 11, 2015
Ms. Heiser advised that the Barry Road ramp from northbound T.H. 100 would be closing for 30
days starting in June after school gets out for the summer. She reported that staff held an
emergency meeting with Police, Fire, and Mn/DOT officials to discuss the City’s public safety
concerns; in addition, a meeting was held with the contractor last week and they have agreed to
develop access roads for police and fire access. She reviewed a request for no parking on one
side of the street on Quentin from 26th to 28th and stated that staff will be asking residents for
feedback on this request and will not take any action until after schools are done for the summer.
She advised that staff is also monitoring the backups on Louisiana Avenue and whether to
consider no parking on Louisiana from Minnetonka Boulevard to the railroad bridge, adding that
staff would request feedback from residents before instituting any temporary parking ban. She
stated that staff has seen additional cut-through in the Brookside neighborhood and has added
stop signs by the Spanish Immersion School. She added that staff has also considered putting
traffic barrels in the middle of the intersection on Vernon which is intended to calm traffic,
adding that staff will reach out to the neighborhood before installing any traffic barrels.
Mr. Harmening advised that staff would be meeting with Mr. Scott McBride of Mn/DOT next
week and noted that the City has asked for a modeling study to be done in anticipation of
Highway 7 being shut down.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Mr. Harmening presented a brochure regarding the summer concerts. He also presented an
informational brochure that homeowners receive at the time of their water meter replacement.
Mayor Jacobs congratulated Mr. Harmening on his 20 years of service with the City.
Councilmember Brausen referenced the three annual reports and work plans contained in the
agenda and asked if Council wants to meet with the Commissions.
Mayor Jacobs stated that the City Council has previously held an informal gathering to meet with
all of the Commissions and suggested doing the same this year.
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
7. Housing Authority (HA) 2014 Annual Report and 2015 Work Plan
8. Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission 2014 Annual Report & 2015 Work Plan
9. Planning Commission 2014 Annual Report and 2015 Work Plan
10. Water Meter Replacement Project Update
11. Municipal State Aid System Revisions
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Preliminary Development Agreement Between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary
Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA/City Council support the proposed Preliminary
Development Agreement with PLACE to formalize the respective parties’ obligations relative to
further defining a mixed-use development at 5725, 5925 and 5815 Highway 7?
SUMMARY: Last fall, the City was awarded a $100,000 Metropolitan Council Livable
Communities Pre-Development Grant for a prospective PLACE development at 5725, 5925 and
5815 Highway 7 (“site”). Grant activities included design work and preparation of market studies
and financial pro forma in connection with the potential project.
At the November 3, 2014 Special Study Session, the EDA reaffirmed its interest in seeing the
PLACE redevelopment project proceed on the former McGarvey Coffee property and the EDA
and City-owned properties to the west. The EDA also directed Staff to secure the former
McGarvey property so as to pursue a mixed-use development on the site similar to the one
PLACE was proposing. On February 2nd the EDA approved a Purchase Agreement and on
February 20th the EDA closed on the property.
Given the above actions, the appropriate next step is to enter into a Preliminary Development
Agreement between the EDA, the City and PLACE. The purpose of which is to formalize the
respective parties’ obligations under the Metropolitan Council grant agreement as well as their
respective responsibilities relative to further defining the project consistent with the parties’
mutual objectives. PLACE also needs formal permission to access the property in order to
conduct its due diligence. Further included in the agreement is an outline for applying for land
use and zoning changes as well as tax increment financing. During the term of the agreement it is
proposed that PLACE be provided with exclusive rights to negotiate acquisition of the subject
properties with the EDA and the City. This is to provide PLACE’s potential funders with assurance
of its ability to secure the subject properties for the proposed development. The Agreement would
terminate if the EDA/City have not approved a formal Redevelopment Contract by February 29,
2016 or sooner by mutual agreement (this is a minor revision from the previous staff report). Staff,
in consultation with the EDA’s legal counsel, prepared the attached Preliminary Development
Agreement which is recommended for approval.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: When appropriate, PLACE expects to
submit an application for TIF assistance.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Preliminary Development Agreement
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, EDA Deputy Executive Director and Deputy City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
APPROVING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, THE
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, AND PLACE
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the “Council”) of the City of St. Louis Park (the
“City”) as follows:
1. Background.
1.01. The City and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”)
own certain property (the “Property”) in the City, which Property has been the subject of certain
preliminary negotiations with PLACE (the “Developer”) for purposes of constructing a mixed-use
(multi-family residential and commercial), mixed-income development on the Property and related
parking, incorporating renewable energy sources including an anaerobic digester (the
“Development”).
1.02. The City, the Authority and the Developer have determined to enter into a
preliminary development agreement (the “PDA”), providing for negotiation of a definitive
development contract that will address (among other things) terms under which the Developer will
construct the Development on the Property, and the City or Authority may provide certain financial
assistance if warranted to make development by the Developer financially feasible.
1.03. The Council has reviewed the PDA, and has determined that it is in the best interests
of the City to approve and execute the PDA.
2. Approval of PDA.
2.01. The City approves the PDA, and authorizes and directs the Mayor and City Manager
to execute same in substantially the form on file, subject to modifications that do not alter the
substance of the transaction and are approved by the Mayor and City Manager, provided that
execution of the PDA by such officials will be conclusive evidence of their approval.
2.02. City officials and consultants are authorized to take any other actions necessary to
carry out the City’s obligations under the PDA, and to bring a proposed definitive development
contract before the City.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”), dated May 18,
2015, by and between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body
corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Authority”), the City of St.
Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”), and PLACE, a Minnesota nonprofit
corporation (the “Developer”);
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority and the City desire to promote development of certain property
within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”) in the City, located at 5725, 5925 and 5815
Highway 7 (the “City and Authority Property”) and 3520 Yosemite Avenue (the “Rail Property”
and together with the City and Authority Property, the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Property is made up of four parcels, of which the City and Authority
Property is owned by the City or the Authority, and the Rail Property is owned by the Hennepin
County Regional Rail Authority; and
WHEREAS, the City and Authority have determined that it is in the best interests of the
City that the Developer be designated as the sole developer of the City and Authority Property
during the term of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City has entered into a grant agreement with the Metropolitan Council to
fund pre-development activities by the Developer in connection with the Developer’s desire to
develop the City and Authority Property (the “Grant Agreement”, and with any future grant
agreements awarded to the City in relation to the City and Authority Property, the “Grant
Agreements”); and
WHEREAS, the Developer desires to acquire the City and Authority Property for purposes
of constructing a mixed-use (multi-family residential and commercial), mixed-income development
on the City and Authority Property incorporating renewable energy sources, including an
anaerobic digester and related parking (the “Development”) , a proposed site plan for which is
attached as Exhibit B; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested the Authority and City to explore the use of tax
increment financing under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended (the “Tax
Increment Act”) or other public financial assistance to offset a portion of the public costs of the
Development; and
WHEREAS, the Authority, the City and the Developer are willing and desirous to undertake
the Development if (i) a satisfactory agreement can be reached regarding the City’s and/or
Authority's commitment for public costs necessary for the Development; (ii) satisfactory mortgage
and equity financing, or adequate cash resources, for the Development can be secured by
Developer; (iii) the parties reach a satisfactory resolution of zoning, land use, public infrastructure,
and site design issues; and (iv) the economic feasibility and soundness of the Development and
other necessary preconditions have been determined to the satisfaction of the parties; and
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into this Agreement setting forth their respective
responsibilities in connection with the Property.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and
obligations set forth herein, the Authority, the City and the Developer hereby agree as follows:
1. During the term of this agreement, the Authority and the City agree to negotiate solely with
the Developer relative to the acquisition and development of the City and Authority Property by the
Developer.
2. The parties agree to work cooperatively towards defining the Development and its
components (including but not limited to site design, building plans and specifications, number of
market-rate and affordable residential units, commercial square footage, building stories and height,
sustainable and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) components and structured parking,
stormwater management, streets and sidewalks, and all other necessary public infrastructure
improvements), determining its financial feasibility, the infrastructure necessary to service it, and
the approvals necessary to bring it to fruition, as well as to negotiate in good faith toward a
definitive Purchase and Redevelopment Contract (the “Contract”) and a related planning
development contract regarding the Development.
3. Developer shall prepare a project pro forma (including a detailed list of various revenue
sources and respective amounts necessary to bring the Development to fruition) and submit it to the
Authority for its review.
4. Developer shall work to secure satisfactory mortgage and equity financing, and additional
forms of financing necessary to bring the Development to fruition.
5. Developer understands the Development will be subject to the City’s Green Building Policy
adopted February 16, 2010, as amended, and agrees to abide by its requirements if the parties enter
into the Contract.
6. In connection with this Agreement, the City and Authority hereby grant to the Developer, its
agents, employees, officers, and contractors (the “Authorized Parties”) a right of entry on the City
and Authority Property for the purpose of performing all due diligence work and inspections
deemed necessary by the Developer to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement (the “Permitted
Activities”). The Authorized Parties shall have access to the City and Authority Property seven (7)
days a week between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. Developer hereby agrees to be
responsible for any and all costs related to the Permitted Activities conducted on the City and
Authority Property, and to restore the City and Authority Property to its original condition upon
completion of the Permitted Activities. Developer agrees to indemnify, save harmless, and defend
the City, the Authority, and their officers and employees, from and against any and all claims,
actions, damages, liability and expense in connection with personal injury and/or damage to the City
and Authority Property arising from or out of any occurrence in, upon or at the City and Authority
Property caused by the act or omission of the Authorized Parties in conducting the Permitted
Activities on the City and Authority Property, except (a) to the extent caused by the negligence,
gross negligence, willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct by the City or
Authority, their officers, employees, agents or contractors; and (b) to the extent caused by a “Pre-
Existing Condition” as defined in this paragraph 6. “Pre-Existing Condition” shall mean any
condition caused by the existence of hazardous substances or materials in, on, or under the City and
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4a) Page 5
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
Authority Property, including without limitation hazardous substances released or discharged into
the drainage systems, soils, groundwater, waters or atmosphere, which condition existed as of the
date of this Agreement and became known or was otherwise disclosed or discovered by reason of
the Authorized Parties’ entry onto the City and Authority Property.
7. The City will determine the municipal regulatory approvals required for the Development
including, but not limited to, land use amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, zoning changes,
permits, and any other necessary municipal approvals.
8. The City agrees to provide guidance to the Developer on its applications for any approvals
or land use guidance and zoning changes as may be required in connection with the Development.
However, the City makes no guarantees as to any approvals or land use guidance and zoning
changes as may be required in connection with the Development.
9. The City will review existing traffic studies pertinent to the Development and undertake any
additional traffic studies deemed necessary by the City in its sole discretion, and the Developer
agrees to place sufficient funds in escrow to pay for any such studies, upon request by the City.
10. The Developer agrees to complete an Application for Tax Increment Finance Assistance
(the “Application”), and pay the required application fee to the Authority.
11. The Authority agrees to direct its staff and legal and financial consultants to review and
analyze the Application and the Development’s pro forma and help determine the terms of tax
increment or other financial assistance required for the Development.
12. The Authority agrees to undertake an analysis to determine the feasibility of creating a tax
increment financing district in connection with the Development and Property, and Developer
agrees to place sufficient funds in escrow to pay for any such analysis. The Developer will
cooperate with the Authority’s review and analysis, and provide to the Authority all documents and
information requested by the Authority in connection with that effort.
13. If, in the Authority’s sole discretion, the Development is feasible and public financial
assistance is indicated, the Authority, the City, and the Developer will negotiate towards a definitive
Contract providing generally for (a) purchase of the Property by the Developer; (b) pay-as-you-go
tax increment assistance in an amount determined by the Authority to be necessary to make the
Development financially feasible; (c) disbursement of grant proceeds under the Grant Agreements
to Developer for stated activities in accordance with the Grant Agreements; and (d) timely
construction of the Development by Developer. Any definitive Contract is subject to approval by
the Authority’s board of commissioners. It is expressly understood that the Contract, when
executed, will supersede this Agreement in all respects. Execution and implementation of the
Contract shall be subject to:
(a) A determination by the Authority in its sole discretion that its undertakings
are feasible based on (i) the projected tax increment revenues and any other revenues
designated by the Authority or City, including Grants; (ii) the purposes and objectives of
any tax increment, development, or other plan created or proposed for the purpose of
providing financial assistance for the Development; and (iii) the best interests of the City
and Authority.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4a) Page 6
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
(b) A determination by the Authority that any financial assistance is reasonably
necessary in order to make the Development financially feasible, and that any such
assistance is limited to the amount necessary to achieve financial feasibility based on
Developer’s pro forma and review of all the facts and circumstances.
(c) A determination by the Developer that the Development is both market and
economically feasible and in the best interests of the Developer, and that the Developer is
able to meet all the requirements of the Contract and of the Grants under the Grant
Agreements.
14. The Developer will reimburse the Authority for all out-of-pocket costs incurred by the
Authority in connection with review and analysis of the Development. Such costs include fees paid
to attorneys, the Authority’s financial advisor, and any planning and engineering consultants
retained by the Authority in connection with review of the Development. The Developer must pay
such costs to the Authority within 10 days after receipt of a written invoice from the Authority
describing the amount and nature of the costs to be reimbursed.
15. TheThis Agreement may be terminated (a) by the Developer may at any time terminate this
Agreement upon 10 day’s written notice to the Authority; (b) by mutual written agreement of all
parties hereto; or (c) pursuant to paragraph 17 hereof. Upon such termination, no party shall have
any further obligations to the others under this Agreement, except that Developer remains obligated
to pay any costs payable under paragraph 13 that were incurred by the Authority before the effective
date of termination.
16. In expansion and not in limitation of paragraph 14 hereof, Developer agrees to notify the
Authority and City and to terminate this Agreement as soon as reasonably practicable if the
Developer determines that the proposed Development is not market and economically feasible
and/or Developer is unable to secure the financing necessary for the Development, or if the
Developer for any reason is unable to bring the Development to fruition.
17. This Agreement shall terminate by its terms if the governing bodies of the Authority and
City have not approved the Contract by December 31, 2015.February 29, 2016. Upon such
termination, the Developer remains obligated to pay any costs payable under paragraph 13 that were
incurred by the Authority and the City prior to such date.
17.18. Notice or demand or other communication between or among the parties shall be
sufficiently given if sent by mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or delivered personally:
(a) As to the City:
City of St. Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
(b) As to the Authority:
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4a) Page 7
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
(c) As to the Developer:
PLACE
100 Portland Ave. South
Minneapolis, MN 55401
18.19. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, all
of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
19.20. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of Minnesota. Any disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of this Agreement shall
be heard in the state or federal courts of Minnesota, and all parties to this Agreement waive any
objection to the jurisdiction of these courts, whether based on convenience or otherwise.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4a) Page 8
Title: Preliminary Development Agreement between the EDA, the City, and PLACE
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Authority have caused this Agreement to be duly
executed in their name and behalf and their seal to be duly affixed hereto and the Developer has
caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the date and year first above written.
PLACE ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By:
Its ______________________________ Its President
Its Executive Director
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
Its Mayor
Its City Manager
EXHIBIT A
Description of PropertyEXHIBIT B
458659v5 MNI SA285-104
Site Plan
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design
Guidelines
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the second reading and Adopt Ordinance
amending the zoning ordinance relating to yards, parking, and screening requirements; and
authorize summary publication.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council support the proposed changes to the zoning
ordinance?
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. The City
Council recommended approval of the Ordinance changes during the first reading on May 4,
2015.
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.
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
Summary of Ordinance Changes
Prepared by: Nicole Mardell, Community Development Intern
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4b) 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 18, 2015 (Item No. 4b) 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 18, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 4
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
ORDINANCE NO. 15-____
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 36 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
RELATING TO YARDS, PARKING, AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS
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
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
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 5
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
* 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
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.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 6
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
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
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 7
Title: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Pertaining to the South Side of Excelsior Design Guidelines
SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO. 15-____
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO YARDS, PARKING AND SCREENING
This ordinance states that amendments to setbacks, parking and screening will be made in the C1
Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District and the C2 General Commercial Zoning District.
This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and Redevelopment
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the acquisition of the “13th Lane” and
“Texas Avenue” properties currently owned by the Minnesota Department of Transportation
(MnDOT) and to sell the properties to Melrose Development, LLC and enter into a purchase
agreement with the same.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council wish to acquire and subsequently sell the two
above mentioned vacant properties to Melrose Development to facilitate redevelopment
consistent with the concept shown to Council February 2, 2015?
SUMMARY: Melrose Development is interested in the vacant properties at 13th Lane and
Texas Avenue for a multi-family redevelopment. The properties are currently unplatted and
referred to as the 13th Lane Parcel and the Texas Avenue Parcel. (A map is attached showing
their locations.) Approximately 34 units are proposed for the 13th Lane site, and 34 units for the
Texas Ave site. The redevelopment concept was presented to the Council at the February 2, 2015
Study Session. At that meeting the Council indicated they were generally supportive of the
redevelopment concept presented by Melrose Development, and would be willing to consider a
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendment and Planned Unit Development (PUD) on these sites
to facilitate the redevelopment concept.
The properties are currently owned by MnDOT and the City initiated the conveyance process
with MnDOT due to the interest expressed by Melrose Development in redeveloping the
properties. MnDOT has provided conditional letters of approval for both properties. With the
Council’s previous direction, Staff has continued moving forward with property acquisition and
finalizing a purchase agreement with Melrose. Staff does not support holding the properties, and
as such, supports serving as a conduit between MnDOT and Melrose Development in order to
facilitate the conveyance of the properties to Melrose for redevelopment. A closing with Melrose
Development is tentatively scheduled for June 8, 2015, if the Council approves the acquisition of
the properties and agreement with Melrose. Staff anticipates applications for a Comprehensive
Plan Amendment, Plat, and PUD this summer.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The total price for the two properties is
$488,000. The City would first collect the funds from Melrose Development, and then
simultaneously close on the properties with MnDOT and Melrose Development. The developer
is not requesting any financial assistance.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Map of Area of Interest
Purchase Agreement
Prepared by: Ryan Kelley, Associate Planner
Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4c) Title: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and RedevelopmentPage 2
1
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
This Agreement made and entered into this __ day of , 2015, by and
between the City of St. Louis Park (“Seller”) and Melrose Development LLC, its successors
and assigns (“Buyer”).
Whereas, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained and
other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by Buyer to Seller as more fully set forth
below, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the Seller, it is hereby
agreed as follows:
1. Sale of Property. Seller agrees to transfer and convey to Buyer by quit claim deed two
parcels of land located in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota (hereinafter collectively
called the "Subject Properties") as legally described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. The two
parcels identified as “Parcel 1” and “Parcel 2” on Exhibit “A” are commonly referred to as the
13th Lane Property and Texas Avenue Property, respectively.
2. Purchase Price and Manner of Payment. The total purchase price ("Purchase Price")
to be paid by Buyer to Seller in exchange for the quit claim deeds to the Subject Properties shall
be Four Hundred Eighty-eight Thousand and 00/100s Dollars ($488,000.00) payable in cash or
certified funds at closing. The Purchase Price is allocated as follows: $240,000.00 for the 13th
Lane Property and $248,000.00 for the Texas Avenue Property.
The Purchase Price shall be paid by Buyer to Seller upon the full execution of this
Agreement, and shall be held in escrow by Seller for Buyer’s benefit pending Seller’s
confirmation of funds, whereupon Seller shall acquire the Subject Properties from the State of
Minnesota, Department of Transportation (MnDOT) upon the terms and conditions of the offers
made to Seller by MnDOT (collectively, the “MnDOT Offers”) in its letters to Seller dated
March 5, 2015 (as to the Texas Avenue Property) and March 27, 2015 (as to the 13th Lane
Property). Upon such acquisition of the Subject Properties by Seller from MnDOT and Seller’s
tender of the Deeds to Buyer, Buyer shall not under any circumstances be entitled to a return of
the Purchase Price.
3. Closing Costs. In addition to the Purchase Price, Buyer will reimburse Seller for all out-
of-pocket costs incurred by Seller in connection with review and analysis of the conveyance
from MnDOT to Seller and from Seller to Buyer. Such costs may include survey and platting
costs, fees paid to attorneys, and any planning and engineering consultants retained by Seller in
connection with review of the conveyances. Buyer shall also be responsible for state deed tax,
recording fees, title examination and any other costs relating to the MnDOT transfer to Seller
and the transfer to Buyer by Seller.
4. Date and Place of Closing. The date for the closing of the sale shall be on or before
June 25, 2015, or on such other date as the parties mutually agree at a location on which the
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4c)
Title: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and Redevelopment Page 3
2
parties can mutually agree, but in all events promptly upon receipt of the quit claim deeds from
MnDOT pursuant to the terms of the MnDOT Offers. Possession of the Subject Properties to
Buyer shall be delivered at closing.
5. Seller Makes No Representations and Warranties. Seller is acting solely as a conduit
for the conveyance of the Subject Properties between MnDOT and Buyer and makes no
representation as to the physical condition of or title to the Subject Properties.
6. Acknowledgments of Buyer. Buyer acknowledges that it has been granted access to the
Subject Properties, has inspected the Subject Properties to the extent deemed necessary and
desirable and by consummating the transaction hereby contemplated Buyer shall be deemed to
be satisfied with the condition thereof. Buyer agrees and represents that Buyer is purchasing the
Subject Properties and will accept the Subject Properties in its “as-is” condition. Buyer also
acknowledges that prior to execution of this Agreement it has satisfied itself as to title to the
Subject Properties.
7. Indemnification. Buyer will indemnify and hold Seller harmless from any expenses or
damages, including reasonable attorney’s fees, that Seller incurs in connection with any claim by
a third party relating to the condition of the Subject Properties, including any claim pursuant to
state or federal law relating to the cleanup of hazardous or other regulated substances, that is
based on or results from Seller’s ownership of the Subject Properties.
8. Reconveyance. Buyer will by October 1, 2016 commence construction of a
development on both of the Subject Properties generally consistent with the redevelopment
proposal submitted by Buyer and described in the February 2, 2015 Staff Report to the City
Council of the City of St. Louis Park. If construction has not commenced by this date, Seller
may, at its sole discretion, demand reconveyance to Seller of the parcel(s) on which no
development has commenced. The reconveyance shall occur within ninety (90) days after
written demand to Buyer by Seller. Buyer shall reconvey the parcel or parcels by Limited
Warranty Deed, free and clear of any encumbrances placed on the property after Buyer’s
acquisition of the parcel(s), in exchange for payment of the original Purchase Price set forth in
Paragraph 2 herein for the parcel or parcels being reconveyed, such payment to be made by
Seller to Buyer upon delivery of such Limited Warranty Deed. Seller’s right to demand
reconveyance shall expire on December 1, 2016. These deadlines may be extended to a later date
if mutually agreed upon by Seller and Buyer.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed as of the day and year first above written.
SELLER: CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By:
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4c)
Title: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and Redevelopment Page 4
3
Jeffrey W. Jacobs, Mayor
By:
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager
BUYER: MELROSE COMPANY LLC
By:
___________________, Chief Manager
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4c)
Title: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and Redevelopment Page 5
4
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
“Parcel 1”
All of Tracts A, B, C, D, E, F and G described below:
Tract A
That part of Lot 2, Block 1, Penn-Zayta, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, the title thereto being registered; lying southerly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Lot 2, distant 112.56
feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof; thence easterly to a point on the
east line of said Lot 2, distant 113.07 feet northerly of the southeast corner
thereof and there terminating;
Tract B.
That part of Lot 3, Block 1, Penn-Zayta, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, the title thereto being registered; lying southerly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Lot 3, distant 113.07
feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof; thence easterly to a point on the
east line of said Lot 3, distant 113.58 feet northerly of the southeast corner
thereof and there terminating;
Tract C.
That part of Lot 4, Block 1, Penn-Zayta, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, the title thereto being registered; lying southerly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Lot 4, distant 113.58
feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof; thence easterly to a point on the east line of said
Lot 4, distant 114.09 feet northerly of the southeast corner thereof and there terminating;
Tract D.
That part of Lot 5, Block 1, Penn-Zayta, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, the title thereto being registered; lying southerly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Lot 5, distant 114.09
feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof; thence easterly to a point on the
east line of said Lot 5, distant 114.60 feet northerly of the southeast corner
thereof and there terminating;
Tract E.
That part of Lot 6, Block 1, Penn-Zayta, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4c)
Title: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and Redevelopment Page 6
5
Minnesota, the title thereto being registered; lying southerly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Lot 6, distant 114.60
feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof; thence easterly to a point on the
east line of said Lot 6, distant 115.11 feet northerly of the southeast corner
thereof and there terminating;
Tract F.
That part of Lot 7, Block 1, Penn-Zayta, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, the title "thereto being registered; lying southerly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Lot 7, distant 115.11
feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof; thence easterly to a point on the
east line of said Lot 7, distant 115.62 feet northerly of the southeast corner
thereof and there terminating;
Tract G.
That part of Lot 8, Block 1, Penn-Zayta, according to the plat thereof on file and
of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, the title thereto being registered; lying southerly of the following
described line: Beginning at a point on the west line of said Lot 8, distant 115.62
feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof; thence easterly to a point on the
east line of said Lot 8, distant 116.13 feet northerly of the southeast corner
thereof and there terminating.
“Parcel 2”
That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 5,
Township 117 North, Range 21 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as
follows: Beginning at a point on the north line of the Southwest Quarter of said
Section 5, distant 12 rods east of the northwest corner thereof; thence south for 20
rods; thence deflect to the left at an angle of 90 degrees 00 minutes and run
easterly to the public road (known as Texas Avenue) running south from Wayzata
Boulevard (as located and established prior to November 15, 1961); thence north
along said public road to the south line of said Wayzata Boulevard; thence west to
the point of beginning;
containing 1.30 acres, more or less.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4c)
Title: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and Redevelopment Page 7
6
EXHIBIT “B”
TO
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
(Reserved for Recording Data)
____________________________________________________________________________
STATE DEED TAX DUE HEREON: $______
Dated:___________________________, 2015
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a
Minnesota municipal corporation, Grantor, hereby conveys and quit claims to MELROSE
COMPANY LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, Grantee, real property in Hennepin
County, Minnesota, legally described as follows:
See Exhibit “A” attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference.
together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto, subject to the following
exceptions: None
THE GRANTOR CERTIFIES THAT THE GRANTOR DOES NOT KNOW OF ANY WELLS ON THE
DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By:
Jeffrey W. Jacobs, Mayor
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4c)
Title: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and Redevelopment Page 8
7
By:
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager STATE OF
MINNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day of
_____________________, 2015, by Jeffrey W. Jacobs and Thomas K. Harmening, respectively
the Mayor and City Manager of the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation,
on its behalf.
___________________________________
Notary Public
Tax Statements for the real property
described in this instrument should be sent
to: Melrose Company LLC
16676 County Road 9
Lester Prairie, Minnesota 55354
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
CAMPBELL KNUTSON
Professional Association
317 Eagandale Office Center
1380 Corporate Center Curve
Eagan, Minnesota 55121
651-452-5000
TMS/cjh
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4c)
Title: 13th Lane and Texas Avenue Purchase and Redevelopment Page 9
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Municipal State Aid System Revisions
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution establishing certain Municipal State
Aid Street segments and a resolution revoking certain Municipal State Aid Street segments.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to revise the designation of certain
Municipal State Aid Streets?
SUMMARY: The City St. Louis Park has 148.62 miles of street under its jurisdiction. A
portion of these streets are designated and eligible for funding for replacement using Municipal
State Aid funds (MSA). In 2014, Staff completed a city wide audit of the street mileage in St.
Louis Park as a part of putting together our annual MSA certificate of mileage to MnDOT.
During this review the following was determined:
• There are a number of frontage roads in St. Louis Park that are maintained by the City but
are located on MnDOT right-of-way. The streets were expending City resources but
were not generating state aid funds for the City, because they were not considered a part
of our overall City street mileage.
• Some Municipal State Aid (MSA) street segments no longer met the requirements for
being on the State Aid system.
• There was excess mileage available for designation.
To address these items, staff has put together recommended MSA system revisions. MnDOT
State Aid has reviewed the recommended revisions and will approve this designation request
upon receipt of a City Council resolution ordering the same. Revisions to the MSA system can
be made until June 1 each year.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Annually, the City receives $1.7 million
dollars in Municipal State Aid funds. The MSA funding formula is partially based on the
mileage reported annually and partially based on population. The act of designating all of the
mileage available to the City results in maximizing the funds available for maintenance and
construction on Municipal State Aid Street segments. Approving these revisions is expected to
result in an increase to our annual allotment from the State. Due to the nature of the State Aid
funding formula it is difficult to give an exact number; however, staff expects it to be between
$50- 75,000 in additional annual funding.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolutions (2)
Frontage Road Release Maps
Proposed System Revision Map
Prepared by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Each year city engineers must submit the necessary information that explains
their road, structure, and railroad crossing funding needs to the Commissioner of Transportation
via the State Aid system. St. Louis Park has 148.62 miles of street under our jurisdiction.
An urban municipality’s Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) system is comprised of 20 percent
of a city’s county road and local improved mileage. County roads and County State Aid
Highways (CSAH) that have reverted back to the municipality may be included above the 20
percent mileage limitation. St. Louis Park can designate up to 31.92 miles of street as MSA.
This is our 20 percent mileage (29.72) plus 3.54 miles for county road turnbacks. Currently, the
City has 1.34 miles undesignated.
The City Engineer of each urban municipality must submit a completed Annual Certification of
Mileage form on or before January 15 of each year. Any system revisions must be approved by
MnDOT State Aid by June 1.
In 2014, Staff completed a city wide audit of the street mileage in St. Louis Park as a part of
putting together our annual certificate of mileage. This review resulted in the following
recommended revisions to the MSA system:
Frontage Road Releases.
There were a number of frontage roads in St. Louis Park that are maintained by the City but are
located on MnDOT right-of-way. The streets were expending City resources but were not
generating state aid funds for the City. In 2014, staff worked with MnDOT on the release of the
frontage road right- of- way, and officially added 3.01 miles to our road network in December
2015. Adding these roads to our system increased our available 20 percent mileage by 0.60
miles. Attached are figures showing the frontage roads that were released by MnDOT to the City.
MSA Revocations
During our review of the system, staff determined that there were segments that either were not
generating funds or were not eligible for State Aid designation. Staff recommends that the
following segments be removed from the MSA system for the reasons detailed below.
Proposed Revocations From To
W. Lake Street Brookview Dr MN Hwy 7 Service Road -0.53
W. Lake Street MN Highway 7 MN Hwy 7 Service Road -0.02
W. Lake Street Walker Street MN Highway 7 -0.05
Future Street No. 284 W. 36th Street Park Commons Drive -0.32
Quentin Avenue Park Commons Drive Excelsior Boulevard -0.06
Total revoked mileage -0.98
When a segment is on the MSA system, the funding is based on the characteristics of the street.
Details such as traffic volume, width, and material type are used to determine how much money
each segment generates for the City. As a result, when a street segment is “non-existing” it does
not generate funds for the City. The following street segments do not “exist” on the ground:
• Future Street No. 284, (W. 36th Street and Park Commons Drive) and
Quentin Avenue (Park Commons Drive to Excelsior Boulevard)
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 3
Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions
The majority of this MSA street segment does not exist. The “future street” has been
included in planning documents, however, since it does not exist, it is not generating
funds. Removing the “future street” makes the existing segment of Quentin no longer
compliant with the minimum requirements for designation, so it is recommended for
removal from the MSA system as well.
• W. Lake Street (Mn Highway 7 and Mn Highway 7 Service Road) and
(Walker Street and MN Highway 7)
As a part of the Hwy 7/ Louisiana project, these segments of Lake Street were eliminated.
In order for a segment to receive MSA designation it must terminate with another State Aid
Street, a State Highway, or a County Roadway. The following street segment does not meet this
minimum requirement:
• W. Lake Street, between Brookview Drive and MN 7 Service Road.
In addition to not meeting this requirement, Metropolitan Council is reconstructing this
street as a part of their force main project, so it will not be requiring major maintenance
for at least 20 years. Removing it from our system is recommended because it does not
meet the minimum requirements, has low traffic volumes, and MSA construction funds
are needed on other segments within the City.
Excess Mileage
As a result of Frontage Road releases and the recommended revocations, the City has excess
mileage available for designation. Staff recommends the following segments be added to the
MSA system:
Proposed Additions
Street Name From To Length
(Miles)
Wayzata Boulevard* Minnetonka City Limits Golden Valley City Limits 0.20
Wayzata Boulevard Louisiana Avenue Colorado Avenue 0.58
MN Highway 7 Service Road Texas Avenue W. Lake Street 0.49
MN Highway 7 Service Road W. Lake Street Wooddale Avenue S. 0.45
Texas Avenue N. MN Highway 7 MN Hwy 7 Service Road 0.02
Quentin Avenue Hwy 100 North Bound Frontage Cedar Lake Road 0.08
Old Cedar Lake Road Quentin Avenue MN Highway 100 Ramp 0.03
Zarthan Avenue Cedar Lake Road 16th Street 0.16
Total: 2.01
*Route addition approved by both Golden Valley and Minnetonka
Once designated as MSA routes, MSA funds can be utilized for both maintenance and
construction of these roads. What follows is a compilation of the proposed revisions discussed
above (see next page). As you will see below .31 miles will still be undesignated, which is not
unusual in the context of the total mileage we have available to us.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 4
Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions
Proposed Additions
Street Name From To Length
(Miles)
Wayzata Boulevard* Minnetonka City Limits Golden Valley City Limits 0.20
Wayzata Boulevard Louisiana Avenue Colorado Avenue 0.58
MN Highway 7 Service Road Texas Avenue W. Lake Street 0.49
MN Highway 7 Service Road W. Lake Street Wooddale Avenue S. 0.45
Texas Avenue N. MN Highway 7 MN Hwy 7 Service Road 0.02
Quentin Avenue Hwy 100 North Bound Frontage Cedar Lake Road 0.08
Old Cedar Lake Road Quentin Avenue MN Highway 100 Ramp 0.03
Zarthan Avenue Cedar Lake Road 16th Street 0.16
Total: 2.01
Revoke From To
W. Lake Street Brookview Dr MN Hwy 7 Service Road -0.53
W. Lake Street MN Highway 7 MN Hwy 7 Service Road -0.02
W. Lake Street Walker Street MN Highway 7 -0.05
Future Street No. 284 W. 36th Street Excelsior Boulevard -0.32
Quentin Avenue Park Commons Drive Excelsior Boulevard -0.06
Total Revoked mileage -0.98
Unassigned Mileage: -1.34
Net Unassigned Mileage -0.31
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 5
Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CERTAIN
MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREETS
WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the streets
hereinafter should be designated Municipal State Aid Street under the provisions of Minnesota
Law;
NOW, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, that the roads are described as follows, to-wit:
be, and hereby are established, located, and designated as Municipal State Aid Streets of said
City, subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for
consideration, and that upon the Commissioner’s approval of the designation of said street or
portion thereof, that same be constructed, improved, and maintained as a Municipal State Aid
Street of the City of St. Louis Park.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Street Name From To
Wayzata Boulevard Minnetonka City Limits Golden Valley City Limits
Wayzata Boulevard Louisiana Avenue Colorado Avenue
MN Highway 7 Service Road Texas Avenue W. Lake Street
MN Highway 7 Service Road W. Lake Street Wooddale Avenue S.
Texas Avenue N. MN Highway 7 MN Highway 7 Service Road
Quentin Avenue Cedar Lake Road Old Cedar Lake Road
Old Cedar Lake Road Quentin Avenue MN Highway 100 Ramp
Zarthan Avenue Cedar Lake Road 16th Street
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 6
Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION REVOKING CERTAIN
MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREETS
WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the streets
hereinafter should no longer be designated Municipal State Aid Street under the provisions of
Minnesota Law;
NOW, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, that the roads are described as follows, to-wit:
be, and hereby are no longer established, located, and designated as Municipal State Aid Streets
of said City, subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of
Minnesota.
Street Name From To
W. Lake Street MN Highway 7 MN Highway 7 Service Road
W. Lake Street Walker Street MN Highway 7
Future Street No. 284 W. 36th Street Park Commons Drive
Quentin Avenue Park Commons Drive Excelsior Boulevard
BE IT FURTHER RESOVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for
consideration, and that upon the Commissioner’s approval of the designation of said streets or
portion thereof, that same no longer be constructed, improved, and maintained as a Municipal
State Aid Street of the City of St. Louis Park.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions Page 7
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Title: Municipal State Aid System RevisionsPage 8
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions Page 9
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions Page 10
2
0.58 Miles - AddWayzata BlvdFrom: Louisiana Ave STo: Colorado Ave
0.33 Miles - AddQuentin AveFrom: Hwy 100 NB FrontageTo: Cedar Lake Rd
0.62 Miles RequiredIn Golden Valley ToMake MSA Connection
0.20 Miles - AddWayzata BlvdFrom: Minnetonka City LimitsTo: Golden Valley City Limits
0.06 Miles RequiredIn Minnetonka ToMake MSA Connection
0.49 Miles - AddMN 7 Service RdFrom: Texas Ave NTo: W Lake St
0.45 Miles - AddMN 7 Service RdFrom: W Lake StTo: Wooddale Ave S
0.53 Miles - RevokeW Lake StFrom: Brookview DrTo: MN 7 Service RdMSA Route #281
0.38 Miles - RevokeFuture StreetFrom: W 36th StTo: Excelsior BlvdMSA Route #284
0.07 Miles - RevokeW Lake StFrom: Walker StTo: Brownlow AveMSA Route #281
0.02 Miles - AddTexas Ave NFrom: MN 7To: MN 7 Service Rd
0.16 Miles - AddZarthan AveFrom: Cedar Lake RdTo: 16th St
Map Document: \\arcserver1\gis\STLP\_Basemap\ESRI\Maps\2015\MSA_Maps\Stlp MSA Option-1 11x17.mxdDate Saved: 4/22/2015 3:14:11 PMMSA Mileage Options Option 1
April, 2015
Legend
MSA - Add (Approved)*
MSA - Add
MSA - Revoke
MSA - Non Existing/Future
MSA (Existing)
MSA - Adjacent City (Pending)*
CSAH
Local Roads
City Limits
0 0.5
Miles
I
Source: St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, MnDOT
Information
Current MSA Mileage Available = 1.34 Miles
Add (Approved):
MSA - Add (Approved)*= (0.20 Miles)
Add:
MSA - Add = (2.03 Miles)
Revoke:
MSA - Revoke = 0.98 Miles
Proposed MSA Mileage Available =0.09 Miles
*Route addition approved on April 15, 2015
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4d)
Title: Municipal State Aid System Revisions Page 11
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Retirement Recognition Resolution for Public Service Worker David Vann
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution to recognize Public Service
Worker David Vann for his 33 years of service to the City of St. Louis Park.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: City policy states that employees who retire or resign in good standing with over
20 years of service will be presented with a resolution from the Mayor, City Manager and City
Council. Dave has chosen not to be honored with a presentation, and will not be attending the
Council Meeting.
This consent item will officially adopt the resolution that honors Dave for his years of service.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR Coordinator
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: David Vann Retirement Recognition
RESOLUTION NO. 15-___
RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF AND EXPRESSING APPRECIATION
TO PUBLIC SERVICE WORKER DAVID VANN
WHEREAS, David began his employment with the City of St. Louis Park over 33 years ago
on December 21, 1981; and
WHEREAS, Dave has expertly maintained, rehabbed, and restored our many baseball and
softball fields, while working with youth, high school, and adult user groups to provide high
quality game day experiences; and
WHEREAS, Dave has groomed and flooded our many skating rinks with great attention to
detail, giving many winter recreation users and adult organized recreation teams the opportunity
to play hockey, broomball, and ice skate on a high quality surface; and
WHEREAS, Dave has been a mentor and leader to many younger members of the staff by
leading by example with a commitment to hard work, attention to detail, and a friendly attitude
to his coworkers and the public; and
WHEREAS, Dave will enjoy his retirement with his wife Barb at their home in Plymouth,
and their cabin on Crooked Lake enjoying happy hour, pontoon rides, golfing with friends, and
watching his sons Grant and Jake continue to grow. In addition, Dave will make many stops at
the MSC in support of our local sports teams.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Public Service Worker
David Vann for his great contributions and 33 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis
Park and wish him the best in his retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
MINUTES
ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION: SUSTAINABLE SLP
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
April 7, 2015
Community Room, City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Terry Gips, Rachel Harris, Paul Zeigle, Cindy Larson O’Neil, Judy
Voigt, Chris Anderson, Nancy Rose, Mark Eilers and Renee McGarvey
EXCUSED ABSENCE: Alex Sundvall and Karen Laumb
STAFF PRESENT: Phillip Elkin and Brian Hoffman
1. The meeting was called to order at 6:36 p.m.
2. The minutes of the March 4, 2015 meeting were approved unanimously as amended.
3. Chairperson Gips opened the meeting with greetings and a gift of appreciation to Rachel
Harris for her work as the outgoing chairperson. The meeting then focused on reviewing
and editing each of the work groups proposed 2015 work plans.
The commissioners went through each of the previously submitted work plans from the
Energy; Transportation; Water, Land and Wildlife; GreenStep Cities; Communications;
Environmentally Preferred Purchasing; and Education and Action Work Groups. Edits
from each plan were recorded and the work group leaders were assigned to return an
amended copy to Phil for commission-wide distribution.
4. The commissioners then discussed the format of the presentation, with Chairperson Gips
inviting each of the commission members to address the City Council.
5. The Meeting was adjourned at 8:40.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 15, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 6:08 p.m. by Vice Chair Johnston-Madison.
2. Approval of Minutes of April 1, 2015
Commissioner Carper moved approval of the minutes of April 1, 2015. The minutes
were seconded by Commissioner Robertson, and the motion passed on a vote of 3-0-1
(Tatalovich abstained).
3. Public Hearings
A. Brewery Taproom – Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Applicant: Steel Toe Brewery
Case No.: 15-14-ZA
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The proposed
amendment would increase the maximum amount a brewery can produce from 3,500
barrels per year to 20,000 barrels per year in the Business Park (BP) and Industrial Park
(IP) Zoning Districts.
Commissioner Tatalovich asked if the request was made to make it more in line with
Minnesota statute or if the applicant is coming up against the 3,500 barrel maximum.
Mr. Morrison responded that the applicant hasn’t reached the 3,500 barrel maximum yet.
They have nearly doubled their space, including the taproom. They are experiencing a
high demand for their product.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the hearing. As no one was present wishing to
speak, she closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson remarked that the amendment is keeping up with state law. He
said Steel Toe Brewing is a great asset to the community.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Zoning
Ordinance Amendment pertaining to Breweries in the Industrial Park and Business Park
zoning districts. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed
on a vote of 4-0.
B. Preliminary and Final Plat of Minnota Addition
Location: 4903 Cedar Lake Road S.
Applicant: Erdogan Akguc
Case No.: 15-09-S
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report.
The applicant, Erdogan Akguc, stated that he has owned the property for 10 years and he
is looking forward to building on it.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the public hearing. As no one was present
wishing to speak, she closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Carper made a motion recommending approval of the Preliminary/Final
Plat of Minnota Addition, subject to conditions. Commissioner Robertson seconded the
motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
C. Preliminary Plat with Subdivision Variances and Preliminary PUD Zoning
Location: 4760 and 4900 Excelsior Boulevard
Applicant: Oppidan, Inc.
Case No.: 15-03-S and 15-04-PUD
Sean Walther, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. The request would allow
construction of a six-story, mixed use building with 28,228 square feet of commercial
(specialty grocery store possibly including a liquor store), 189 apartment units, and
structured parking. The PUD is a rezoning of the property under the City’s new PUD
ordinance.
Mr. Walther spoke about the grade of the site sloping from south to north. The building
is six stories tall. At the sides of the property along Quentin and Princeton the building
does step down, but as the grade changes, the underground parking below the building
becomes exposed. Essentially the building will look about 75 feet and about 6 stories tall
on both the north and south sides of the development.
In his discussion about landscaping, Mr. Walther spoke about vine plantings which are
proposed along some of the building walls especially along the north side where the
exposed parking walls are located. He also spoke about a proposed partial “green wall”
element along the Quentin Ave. side. Mr. Walther noted that staff is recommending
some additional improvements to the landscaping.
Mr. Walther discussed parking, access and the traffic study. He stated that the traffic
study concluded the proposed development will have little impact on the adjacent street
operations and intersections.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
Mr. Walther said the staff report includes a number of suggested revisions to the
proposed plan including landscaping, utility plan, the removal of stairways proposed
along Princeton Ave., and additional attention to waste storage and handling. Staff is
requesting that those revisions be incorporated before the request goes to the City
Council.
Commissioner Robertson asked for the rationale behind the subdivision variance request.
Mr. Walther explained that five feet appears to be adequate along Quentin Ave. S., Park
Commons Dr., and Princeton Ave. S. for proposed and future utility needs surrounding
the property. The 10-foot easements along Excelsior Blvd. and the existing 66 ft. wide
right-of-way of Quentin Ave. S. also provide adequate space for future utility needs to
serve both the site and the surrounding area.
Commissioner Carper spoke about the transit service parking reduction and asked where
the bus stops are located.
Mr. Walther responded that an existing bus stop is in front of the building site on the
northeast corner of Quentin and Excelsior (Route 12). There is also a bus stop on the
southwest corner of Quentin and Excelsior (Route 12). He added that there are also two
other circulator routes in that area.
Commissioner Carper asked about proposed parking spaces and bus pull-out lane.
Mr. Walther stated that bus drivers prefer to stay out in the lane and to stop along the
street curb.
Commissioner Carper asked why that doesn’t occur at Excelsior & Grand.
Mr. Walther responded that was probably a local preference and Metro Transit agreed to
do so.
Commissioner Carper asked about building heights from Monterey down to the Bally’s
site.
Mr. Walther said the Trader Joe’s building at Monterey is a five-story building and is 63
feet tall. The first and second phases of Excelsior & Grand are four-story buildings and
50 feet tall. The proposed development is 75 feet tall to the roof and 85 feet tall to the
roof top terrace structures.
Commissioner Carper asked about the Excelsior & Grand easement.
Mr. Walther said no drainage and utility easements were provided in the Excelsior and
Grand development, although the buildings are set back 5 feet from the property lines.
He added that the City did require additional right-of-way dedications, but there are no
drainage and utility easements provided. He noted that similar reductions were done for
the Ellipse development as well as the Shops at West End.
Commissioner Carper asked why the main entrance to the grocery store is on Excelsior
Blvd. when the majority of the parking is behind the building.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 4
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
Mr. Walther responded this relates to how the building design addresses the street and
sidewalks along the front of the building in order to create a more pedestrian-friendly
environment along that public space. He spoke about the other access point from the
parking lot that will allow customers to come into a vestibule space and move into the
grocery store. While there may be more customers entering from the parking spaces
behind the grocery store, having an entry from Excelsior Boulevard and maintaining
access into the building from the public sidewalk is needed and required to encourage use
of the on-street parking and transit to access the site.
Commissioner Carper asked if the long wall would be made out of Class I materials. He
asked if there would be any textural elements on the wall.
Mr. Walther said there are some details added at the corners of the building. It changes
from the brick material to the stucco material in the center, and both are considered Class
I materials. Boulevard landscaping and trees will be located there. Vine plantings are
proposed along the foundation of the wall to soften the appearance of the wall at the
pedestrian level.
Commissioner Carper asked if any kind of differentiation on the wall can be required.
Mr. Walther stated that the developer is meeting the minimum Class I material
requirement on the site. He added that as a Planned Unit Development there is the
ability to request or require additional changes to the project.
Commissioner Carper spoke about the short growing season for vine plantings.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison discussed the Excelsior & Grand concept of four stories
which she said seems more appropriate for the area.
Commissioner Robertson asked about adaptability of the grocery store space if the use
needs to change.
Mr. Walther stated that building does have some flexibility. The struggle may be more
about the access from the rear of the property. A common corridor might be needed for
multiple uses for both customers and shared use of the loading dock. He added that there
are opportunities for additional entrances along the street as well as along Quentin Ave.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said the location of the liquor sales portion of the store will
be important regarding deliveries. She asked hours of operation for the store.
Mr. Walther said deliveries will be made off of Quentin Ave. Trucks would enter from
Quentin, and back into the loading dock area. Delivery times could be included as a
condition of approval if desired. The developer stated at the neighborhood meeting that
the grocery store hours of operation could be from 6 a.m. to midnight.
The applicant Paul Tucci, Oppidan, said the architectural element going up to 85 feet is
trellis, but rooftop decks are not proposed in those areas. He said they anticipate having
20 affordable units in the building. He discussed parking and said they are comfortable
that they have met the City’s parking ordinance requirements.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 5
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
Mr. Tucci discussed the traffic study conducted by Spack Consulting.
Mr. Tucci said at one time they looked at doing four stories but in order to include
affordable housing and make their numbers work they needed to increase their unit count.
He spoke about working with the setback, the ability to get the unit count necessary and
the resulting elevation.
Mr. Tucci said there is some potential to do a planted wall area. He described a series of
small potted vines which are not designed to be 12 month vines. A mural was a
possibility.
Mr. Tucci discussed the retail and the market study. Delivery restrictions have not been
discussed with the grocery company yet. Reasonable delivery times can be
accommodated.
Commissioner Carper asked for more information about the sixth story.
Mr. Tucci said the sixth story is primarily on the front 25% of the building with 12
residential units. There is a decorative trellis element on the ends of the building.
Commissioner Carper asked how the proposed stairway area would be redesigned.
Mr. Tucci explained there wouldn’t be a full foundation at the bottom of the stairs. It
would be more like a patio footing. He said they requested the variance with the caveat
that they would do some kind of encroachment agreement so if the city needed to do
work it would be the developer’s responsibility to pay for the removal and reconstruction
of the stairway.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said she is concerned that the traffic study is very positive
in its assumptions. She said residents at the neighborhood meeting expressed concern
about cut-through traffic.
Mr. Walther said the trip distributions indicated in his presentation indicate that about 5%
of vehicle trips from the apartment would be using Quentin Ave. About 15% of trips
associated with the grocery store would also use Quentin.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison asked about lighting on the building.
Mr. Tucci said internal lighting would come from the grocery store and apartment units.
No street lights will be added and no lighting on the building is currently proposed. He
said there may be a name put on the building which could be lit.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said residents were concerned about what the site would
look like during winter and spring months. She asked if the developer would do a study
on that and meet with the residents again.
Mr. Tucci said residents would see the building with some street level landscaping. He
said site line studies could be done, but the view would be as the elevations indicate.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the public hearing.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 6
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
Commissioners received copies of e-mail correspondence from the following residents:
Janice Goldstein, 4730 Park Commons Dr., #313; Dan Steeves, 4034 Quentin Ave. S.;
Lyn Wik, 3965 Quentin Ave. S.; Matt Stangl; and Steven Katkov, 3904 Kipling Ave. S.
Four indicated concerns with the proposal and/or opposition to the proposal, and Mr.
Steeves’s email supported the application, but questioned the sustainability of another
grocery store.
Jim Beneke, 3934 Ottawa Ave. S., stated there were several signs that the development is
way too big. He said there were several tricks on the parking such as tandem parking and
shared parking. He said even with the tricks they were kind of iffy on parking spaces.
He said if it was developed according to high density residential zoning it would have
been restricted to 110 units. He said he doesn’t think it should even be taken as a
starting point for negotiations. Mr. Beneke stated he didn’t think it was a serious
development offer at all.
Robert Reinhardt, 4713 Vallacher Ave. S., said he overlooks the Bally’s site. He spoke
about ice, snow and water falling from overhangs. He said he is very concerned about
the height of the building. He said if Excelsior & Grand can make the numbers work
with four stories then the new proposal should be able to do so. Mr. Reinhardt said the
trellis adds another story. He added that he does see the Excelsior & Grand design
element from his house so he will see the six story design element on the proposed
development. Mr. Reinhardt stated that he hopes another developer can make a four
story project work. He asked if the traffic study was done during MEA week in October.
Catherine Kedzuf, 4755 Park Commons Dr., said her apartment overlooks the grassy
area. She said she frequently makes the left hand turn from Excelsior to Quentin. The
stop light is very lengthy. She said the Bally’s parking ramp is currently used, including
overnight parking. Parking occurs on Quentin on the Bally’s side by employees of the
Park Nicollet building. Ms. Kedzuf said on-street parking is not permitted on Princeton
during the winter overnight. Those units then park at Bally’s lot or the Excelsior &
Grand lot. When overnight parking is allowed parking occurs on both sides of the road.
Ms. Kedzuf said she hoped a traffic study would be conducted regarding safety and day-
to-day walkability for the neighborhood. She suggested double checking the on-street
designated parking especially during the winter months as well as double checking the
stacking numbers. Ms. Kedzuf said she questioned the entrance to the parking ramp on
the Quentin Ave. side and the impact that will have on people coming and going. She
suggested looking at parking spaces/unit. She said in her building most, but not all, of
the underground parking spaces are full and a number of residents utilize the public lot,
including overnight. Ms. Kedzuf recommended standards around construction noise and
traffic. She stated she is in favor of new development but feels further evaluation needs
to be done.
Carol Sandberg, 4820 Park Commons Dr., #29, said she is concerned about the width of
Quentin and Princeton Avenues. She asked if the development will use some of its
property as egress and ingress to their parking rather than using the two lanes on each
street. She stated that rush hour is actually from 7 – 9 a.m. and 4 – 6 p.m.
Mr. Walther said turn lanes on the side streets are not proposed.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 7
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
Ms. Sandberg said she wondered if this small area can support another grocery in
addition to Byerly’s, Target, Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods, and Linden Hills Co-op. She
said she does not feel another grocery store is a viable and good use of the property. She
suggested that a clinic would be a good use.
Sharon Tilden, 4820 Park Commons Dr., #224, asked to see the slide illustrating the
slope. She said her building’s parking is underground. Drivers go down the slope and
cut in and go down further. She said the slope goes all the way down through her
building’s property and is not a gradual slope. She said to say the proposed building is a
five story building is not true. Residents in her building will be looking at a building
which looks to be six or seven stories. Ms. Tilden said drivers park in her building’s
parking spaces all the time to get to the park. She said she spoke with the developer at
the neighborhood meeting about more problems of people parking in her building’s lot.
She said the response was to have those cars towed. She said she was not happy with the
response.
Antonio Spargo, 4860 Park Commons Dr., #104, said looking at the corner of Park
Commons Dr. and Princeton it appears to be closer to seven stories than six on the back
side. The height is much taller than Excelsior & Grand. He said a lot of the current
street parking is by Park Nicollet employees and patients which was probably not
accounted for in the parking study. Mr. Spargo said he rides the Route 12 bus every day
and currently it does pull into a cut-out and pulls out of traffic to let people on and off.
He said the circulator often parks around the block and takes up two parking spots. Mr.
Spargo said parking needs to be considered in the whole study of this development.
Eleanore Merton, 4820 Park Commons Dr., said that six stories is two stories too many.
She said 189 units are too many rental apartments which could add up to 380 extra cars to
the mix, increasing traffic jams and pollution. Ms. Merton suggested a fabric store would
be a good addition to the area.
Nancy Bartsch, 3754 Inglewood Ave. S., said she is concerned about the height, density,
existing traffic at Traffic Joe’s and Excelsior & Grand to Monterey is already crazy, and
cut-through traffic through 38th St. to France. Ms. Bartsch said the cut-through traffic is
already unsafe.
Rita Wagner, 4820 Park Commons Dr., #135, said her main objection is pollution with all
the cars idling. She said she lives on the first floor on the north side of the building. The
proposed building will appear to be eight stories high from her side and it will block all
of her winter sun.
Denise Davis, 4820 Park Commons Dr., a 32-year resident, said she is surprised by the
number of units proposed for the Bally’s site, in addition to the proposed development
units on Monterey. She asked about studies on the effects of high density housing on
neighborhoods. She said she is concerned that Wolfe Park will no longer be a place of
peace and quiet. Ms. Davis stated she is concerned about traffic throughout the
development and Excelsior & Grand area.
Patti Carlson, 3801 Inglewood Ave. S., said she is concerned about the 38th St. cut-
through. She added that the Monterey intersection is currently problematic. She said her
main concern regards the possibility of another liquor store in the grocery store. She said
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 8
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
she thinks there are too many liquor stores in the area as it is. She listed Miracle Mile,
Trader Joe’s, Jennings and Byerly’s. She said Excelsior Blvd. used to be known as a
liquor place and she doesn’t think it is necessary to have another liquor store. Ms.
Carlson said the neighborhood doesn’t need the height of the proposed building.
Michelle Barry, 4524 W. 39th St., stated she is concerned about cut-through traffic on 39th
St. She said drivers go too fast and she has seen a lot of near accidents. Her area doesn’t
have stop signs. She stated other concerns regard the mix of affordable units, average
projected square footage per unit, price/square foot, all rental units, delivery, recycling
management, trash, loading dock size, landscaping of 10% of trees required, vines, and
loss of park view. Ms. Barry said she is concerned about building a canyon wall along
Excelsior Blvd. with Bally’s site proposed development, Excelsior & Grand, Ellipse, and
proposed development at Monterey. She said she does not think that is the character of
the city. She said she wanted everyone to think 20 years in the future when the south
side of Excelsior Blvd. starts to get developed. Ms. Barry said she was concerned about
another grocery store being the main tenant. She said snow removal is already an issue.
She said developers are continuing to push the limits of the original plan for the north
side of Excelsior Blvd.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison asked Mr. Walther to answer some of Ms. Barry’s
questions.
Mr. Walther said all apartments will be rental units. He said staff is also concerned
about the space provided for trash and recycling management. He stated that snow will
be required to be hauled off-site, similar to Excelsior & Grand. The developer would be
responsible for clearing out the parking bays.
The applicant, Paul Tucci, said the traffic study was done Tues., Oct. 14. MEA started at
the end of that week. He said in reference to the comment about towing at the condos,
Mr. Tucci said he believed he asked the resident if the management company did any
enforcement with towing. In regards to cut-through traffic he said the traffic distribution
(Figure A4) is mentioned in the traffic study. He said he would inform Bally’s that
people are parking at the site. He commented that if just Bally’s were to open at the
current site, Oppidan’s traffic engineer estimates that using the ITE trip generation
formula for that use at that location would generate 1,000 cars in/day and 1,000 cars
out/day. Mr. Tucci said liquor store numbers and proximity is a city licensing issue. He
said affordable units will be 1-bedroom and alcove units. Average square footage of 1-
bedrooms will be about 700. Average square footage of 2-bedrooms will be about 1,050.
Trash for residential is inside the parking garage. The exterior trash area is for cardboard
and trash area for grocery store only. The 10% tree replacement will be made up with
cash payment. He said proposed spacing of trees is similar to Excelsior & Grand.
Mr. Tucci said Oppidan has done 35 grocery stores and detailed market analyses are very
accurate. He said the current RC and MX zoning allows six stories with the qualification
that five stories is more keeping in line with Trader Joe’s, Ellipse and E2. He stated that
Oppidan is trying to work within boundaries and setbacks to try to make a viable project.
He said that balconies do not hang over the sidewalk or easement area, with the exception
of 1 or 2 that may just catch the back corner of a sidewalk.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 9
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
Mr. Walther said as shown currently on the plan the sidewalk is continuous from the
street curb to the building especially along Excelsior Blvd. There are three stacks of
decks that hang out from the building. There is a similar situation on the north side.
Erik Gerrits, 4904 Vallacher, said four stories were established for Excelsior & Grand.
Trader Joe building and Ellipse are five stories and the neighborhood would like to
actually stay with what the city started with which is four stories. Mr. Gerrits said he is
concerned with the turn onto Quentin. It is already a hard turn to make with angled
parking located there. There will be back-ups onto Excelsior. He commented there is
not enough room for the density proposed. He said he has concerns about a brand new
grocery store chain.
Sharon Tilden, 4820 Park Commons Dr., #224, said she wished to add to her earlier
comments that when she moved to the area they were told Excelsior & Grand would be
three stories. Then it became four stories. She said the newest proposal is for 5-6
stories and the neighborhood is very upset about this.
As no one else was present wishing to speak, the Vice Chair closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson said the height does not bother him but the development feels
like it is a little too big all around. He said it is short on trees, short on parking, and a
variance requested to get closer. A 10 foot easement would allow more room for trees.
He said he likes the idea of the stairs coming out from the units along Princeton but they
are on the easement. If the building was pulled back just a little bit, a little bit smaller
and relaxed, then the stair amenity would fit. Commissioner Robertson said the
architecture is what is trendy today. He said he understands a developer’s need to
maximize. He said he would vote to approve the plat. He stated he was cautious about
the variance saying if the building was a bit smaller a variance wouldn’t be necessary.
He said the PUD is preliminary but there are issues to work on. He said he probably
would approve the PUD but by not approving the variance and with his other comments
he would hope the final comes back with improvements.
Mr. Walther reviewed the next steps of the new Planned Unit Development process.
After this public hearing the request will go forward to the City Council. If Council
approves the preliminary plat and PUD, the PUD does not come back to Planning
Commission.
Commissioner Carper said the traffic study seems to be reliable. Parking may be tight.
He commented that the city doesn’t choose the retail tenants. He said his primary
concern is the height of the building. He said the city wants to try to increase the amount
of affordable housing in the city. The only way for the developer to make that work is to
have more units.
Commissioner Tatalovich said he agreed with most of Commissioner Robertson’s
concerns. He said he is also concerned about height, traffic and landscaping. He added
there are too many questions. He said he would not be in favor of an overall motion.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said she shared the concerns of the other commissioners.
She said she is concerned about height, density and unanswered questions about the
project. She commented that staff has itemized those questions very well. She
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 10
Title: Planning Commission Minutes of April 15, 2015
discussed needing to ask the City Council about the Comprehensive Plan and why
changes to height are being proposed for this development. She said she understood why
additional units are being proposed to accommodate affordable housing. She stated all
of those things have to be taken back to the City Council for further study. She asked
what could be done by the Planning Commission at this meeting without recommending
the project.
Commissioner Robertson said he would be willing to make a motion to approve the
preliminary plat, deny the variance and recommend denial of the PUD as it currently is
presented. He noted there are lots of recommendations by staff as well as
recommendations and comments by the Commission and before it goes to Council, and if
those things are changed, the Council can look at it at that point. He said he was okay
with denying and moving it forward as it currently is.
Commissioner Carper said he supported that idea.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat
with the conditions stated in the staff report, denial of the Subdivision Variances, and
denial of the Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD). Commissioner Carper
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison asked when the request would go to the City Council.
Mr. Walther said the request is tentatively scheduled for City Council consideration on
May 18, but with requests for amending items, possible consideration of TIF financing,
and study sessions, that date could change. Staff will update the schedule on the City
website when it is known. A mailing with the new date will also go out.
4. Other Business
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
Submitted by,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to open the public hearing, solicit comments and close
the public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Consenting to the Issuance of Health Care
Revenue Refunding Bonds to Refinance Health Care Facilities Located in the City.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
• Does the City Council desire to undertake the action as proposed which authorizes host
approval by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) of the City of St. Paul,
MN for the issuance of private activity revenue bonds, Series 2015A and 2015B for Park
Nicollet, which is now part of HealthPartners?
• The proposed action is consistent with the City’s approach for refunding private activity
revenue bonds.
SUMMARY: Park Nicollet Health Services has requested that the HRA of the City of St. Paul,
MN issue revenue refunding bonds in one or more series, as taxable or tax-exempt obligations in
a principal amount not to exceed $525,000,000. These proceeds will be used to refund one or
more outstanding bond issues and, in addition, pay for the costs of issuance. More information
detailing the entire process is provided in the background section of this report.
NEXT STEPS:
• A public hearing will be held this evening regarding the potential refunding of the bonds
with host approval by the HRA of the City of St. Paul.
• After the public hearing is conducted, the City Council will be asked to consider a
resolution authorizing the HRA of the City of St. Paul to be the issuer of the refunding
bonds and close the sale of the bonds.
• Pending approval of the resolution, the HRA of the City of St. Paul will move forward
with all the required steps and close on the bonds somewhere from late May to mid-June.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City will still receive its fee of 1/8th of
1 percent per annum of the outstanding principal balance that is paid in semi-annual installments,
even with host approval being granted to the HRA of the City of St. Paul.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6a) Page 2
Title: Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Park Nicollet Health Services has requested that the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Paul, MN issue revenue refunding bonds in a
principal amount not to exceed $525,000,000. This action is being done in conjunction with
Health Partners request that the St. Paul HRA refund bonds that had been issued in the past for
them (Note that Park Nicollet has merged with Health Partners). These proceeds will be used to
refinance one or more outstanding bond issues and pay for the costs of issuance. Since St. Louis
Park was an issuer of a portion of the bonds proposed to be refunded, the City Council needs to
conduct a public hearing (scheduled for this evening) and authorize the St. Paul HRA to issue the
refunding bonds for the St. Louis Park portion. Proceeds of the Refunding Bonds are proposed
to be applied to refunding the following obligations:
1) Health Care Facility Revenue Bonds, Series 2006, issued by the Housing and
Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Paul on November 30, 2006, in the original
aggregate principal amount of $176,365,000.
2) Health Care Facilities Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2009, issued by the City of St.
Louis Park, Minnesota on December 31, 2009, in the original aggregate principal amount
of $188,340,000.
3) Health Care Facilities Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2008C, issued by St. Louis Park
on August 14, 2008, in the original aggregate principal amount of $221,850,000.
The Refunding Bonds are proposed to be issued for the benefit of HealthPartners, Inc., Group
Health Plan, Inc., HealthPartners Insurance Company, HealthPartners Administrators Inc.,
Regions Hospital, Park Nicollet Health Services, Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, Park Nicollet
Clinic, Park Nicollet Health Care Products, and PNMC Holdings (collectively, the “Obligated
Group Members”).
Proceeds of the Series 2006 Bonds were loaned to Regions Hospital to:
1) Finance the acquisition, construction, expansion, improvement, remodeling, equipping,
and furnishing of the hospital facilities located at the intersection of Jackson Street and
University Avenue in the City of St. Paul.
2) Refund the Health Care Revenue Bonds of the St. Paul-Ramsey Medical Center Project,
Series 1993, issued by the Authority in the original aggregate principal amount of
$36,340,000, the proceeds of which also financed improvements to the hospital facilities.
Proceeds of the Series 2009 Bonds and the Series 2008C Bonds were loaned to many entities
under the “Park Nicollet” designation to refund obligations issued by the City of St. Louis Park
and that financed the following projects within the City of St. Louis Park:
1) Acquisition, construction, and equipping of an approximately 82,000 square foot building
to house the Cancer Center and related facilities with approximately 31,000 square feet of
the building reserved for future expansion, located at 6490 Excelsior Boulevard.
2) Acquisition, construction, and equipping of a new parking ramp including approximately
1,700 parking stalls adjacent to the Cancer Center.
3) Redesign and renovation of the emergency center at Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital,
located at 6500 Excelsior Boulevard.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6a) Page 3
Title: Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
4) Construction and equipping of a new common entrance to Park Nicollet Methodist
Hospital, the new Cancer Center, and the Meadowbrook Building, and the new Cancer
Center, located at 3931 Louisiana Avenue South.
5) Acquisition, construction, and equipping of an approximately 69,000 square foot Eating
Disorders Institute, including a parking ramp and surface lot with an estimated 220
parking stalls, located at 3525 Monterey Drive.
Proceeds of the Series 2009 Bonds were also used to refund obligations issued by the City that
financed a portion of the following:
1) Construction and equipping of the Obligated Group’s Heart and Vascular Center at Park
Nicollet Methodist Hospital located at 6500 Excelsior Boulevard, which includes a
parking ramp and other improvements.
2) Construction of public infrastructure improvements, and the acquisition and installation
of equipment for Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital.
3) Acquisition and installation of equipment located in Burnsville, Maple Grove and
Wayzata at other Park Nicollet facilities.
Finally, proceeds of the Series 2008C Bonds also refinanced capital improvements to the
facilities of other Park Nicollet facilities originally financed with the proceeds of previous
following obligations issued by the City:
1) Hospital Facilities Refunding Revenue Bonds for Methodist, Series 1990-B
2) Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds, Series 1993A
3) Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds, Series 1993B
4) Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds, Series 1993C.
All facilities to be refinanced with the proceeds of the Refunding Bonds proposed to be issued by
the Issuer will be owned and operated by one or more Obligated Group Members. Proceeds of
the Refunding Bonds will also be used to fund one or more reserve funds and pay the costs of
issuing the Refunding Bonds and other related costs. The maximum aggregate principal amount
of the proposed Refunding Bonds is estimated not to exceed $525,000,000.
The Refunding Bonds will be special, limited obligations of the Issuer, and the Refunding Bonds
and interest thereon will be payable solely from the revenues and assets pledged to the payment
thereof. No holder of any Refunding Bonds will ever have the right to compel any exercise of
the taxing power of the City to pay the Refunding Bonds or the interest thereon, nor to enforce
payment against any property of the City. The Refunding Bonds are to be payable solely from
revenues and security provided by the Obligated Group Members to the Issuer and pledged to the
payment of the Refunding Bonds. Before issuing the Refunding Bonds, the Issuer will enter into
one or more revenue agreements with Obligated Group Members, whereby the Obligated Group
Members will be obligated to make payments at least sufficient at all times to pay the principal
of and interest on the Refunding Bonds when due.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Paul Acting as the Host
There are several reasons why the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Paul
is being recommended to act as the host or Issuer of the bonds:
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6a) Page 4
Title: Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
First, the Series 2006 Bonds issued by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of
St. Paul are almost a certainty to be refunded. It is highly unlikely that market conditions,
meaning interest rates, will change significantly enough in the next several weeks to month that
refunding these bonds will no longer make financial sense.
Second, the economics behind refunding the Series 2008 and 2009 Bonds issued by the City of
St. Louis Park are more sensitive to interest rate changes and other market conditions. Because
of these factors, the economics could cause the 2008 and 2009 Bonds to not be refunded. In
addition, the proposed refunding would merge the separate legacy obligated groups together
providing administrative relief.
Given the combination of Park Nicollet Health Services and HealthPartners, Inc., and certainty
of refunding the 2006 Regions Hospital (in St. Paul) bonds, it seems most logical to have all the
bonds refunded under one entity if market conditions allow. Therefore, based on these items,
staff is recommending that the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Paul act
as the host issuer for the refunding of the outstanding bonds and enter into a joint powers
agreement with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Paul.
Financial Considerations
The City’s policy is to charge a fee of 1/8 of 1 percent per annum of the outstanding principal
amount of private activity revenue bonds. As of December 31, 2014 Park Nicollet had
approximately $356 million outstanding of the total private activity revenue bonds of
approximately $434 million, or 82% of the total. The Park Nicollet bonds generated
approximately $445,000 of the $543,000 of the total fees charged in 2014. With the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority of St. Paul hosting the bond issuance, the City of St. Louis Park
will continue to receive its 1/8 of 1 percent per annum of the outstanding portion of the refunded
2008 and 2009 Bonds and will be paid directly by Park Nicollet to the City of St. Louis Park
upon receiving an invoice from the City semi-annually, which is the current process.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6a) Page 5
Title: Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION CONSENTING TO THE ISSUANCE OF
HEALTH CARE REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS TO
REFINANCE HEALTH CARE FACILITIES LOCATED IN
THE CITY
NOW THREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The City is a home rule city duly organized and existing under its Charter and the
Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota.
1.02. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1655, as amended
(the “Act”), the City is authorized to carry out the public purposes described in the Act by
providing for the issuance of revenue bonds to provide funds to finance or refinance revenue-
producing enterprises located within the City, whether or not operated for profit, engaged in
providing health care services, including, without limitation, hospitals and related medical
facilities or to refund, in whole or in part, bonds previously issued under the authority of the Act.
1.03. Park Nicollet Health Services, Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, Park Nicollet
Clinic, PNMC Holdings, and Park Nicollet Health Care Products, all Minnesota nonprofit
corporations (collectively, “Park Nicollet”), have proposed that the City consent to the issuance
of revenue bonds, in one or more series, as taxable or tax-exempt obligations in an aggregate
principal amount estimated not to exceed $525,000,000 (the “Refunding Bonds”) by the Housing
and Redevelopment Authority of the City of Saint Paul, Minnesota (the “Issuer”), pursuant to the
Act. The Refunding Bonds are proposed to refund various bond issues, including but not limited
to the (i) Health Care Facilities Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services),
Series 2009 (the “Series 2009 Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal
amount of $188,340,000; and (ii) Health Care Facilities Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park
Nicollet Health Services), Series 2008C (the “Series 2008C Bonds”), issued by the City in the
original aggregate principal amount of $221,850,000.
1.04. A portion of the proceeds of the Series 2009 Bonds and the Series 2008C Bonds
were used to refinance the (i) acquisition, construction, and equipping of an approximately
82,000 square foot building to house the Cancer Center and related facilities with approximately
31,000 square feet of the building reserved for future expansion, located at 6490 Excelsior
Boulevard in the City; (ii) acquisition, construction, and equipping of a new parking ramp
including approximately 1,700 parking stalls adjacent to the Cancer Center; (iii) redesign and
renovation of the emergency center at Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, located at 6500
Excelsior Boulevard in the City; (iv) construction and equipping of a new common entrance to
Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, the new Cancer Center, and the Meadowbrook Building,
located at 3931 Louisiana Avenue South in the City; and (v) acquisition, construction, and
equipping of an approximately 69,000 square foot Eating Disorders Institute, including a parking
ramp and surface lot with an estimated 220 parking stalls, located at 3525 Monterey Drive in the
City.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6a) Page 6
Title: Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
1.05. A portion of the proceeds of the Series 2009 Bonds were also used to refinance
the construction and equipping of the Heart and Vascular Center at Park Nicollet Methodist
Hospital, the construction of a parking ramp and other improvements at Park Nicollet Methodist
Hospital, the construction of public infrastructure improvements with respect to the foregoing,
and the acquisition and installation of equipment for Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital.
1.06. Proceeds of the Series 2008C Bonds also refinanced capital improvements to the
facilities of Park Nicollet Health Services, Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, Park Nicollet
Institute, Park Nicollet Clinic, PNMC Holdings, and Park Nicollet Health Care Products
originally financed with the proceeds of the following obligations issued by the City: (i) the
Hospital Facilities Refunding Revenue Bonds (Methodist Hospital Project), Series 1990-B; (ii)
the Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (HealthSystem Minnesota Obligated Group), Series
1993A; (iii) the Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (HealthSystem Minnesota Obligated
Group), Series 1993B; and (iv) the Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (HealthSystem
Minnesota Obligated Group), Series 1993C.
1.07. The facilities to be refinanced with the proceeds of the Refunding Bonds that are
located in the City are referred to herein as the “St. Louis Park Facilities.”
Section 2. Public Hearing. Under Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended (the “Code”), prior to the issuance of the Refunding Bonds, a public hearing,
duly noticed, must be held by the City Council, with respect to the St. Louis Park Facilities. A
public hearing was held on May 18, 2015, after publication of notice in the Sun Sailor, the
official newspaper of the City and a newspaper circulating generally in the City.
Section 3. Preliminary Findings. Based on representations made by Park Nicollet to
the City to date, the City Council hereby makes the following preliminary findings,
determinations, and declarations:
(a) The Issuer will loan a portion of the proceeds of the Refunding Bonds to Park
Nicollet to refinance the St. Louis Park Facilities. The Issuer will enter into one or more revenue
agreements with Park Nicollet requiring loan repayments from Park Nicollet in amounts
sufficient to repay the loans when due and requiring Park Nicollet to pay all costs of maintaining
and insuring the St. Louis Park Facilities.
(b) The Refunding Bonds will be special, limited obligations of the Issuer payable
solely from the revenues pledged to the payment thereof and will not be a general or moral
obligation of the City or be secured by the taxing power or any property or assets of the City.
Section 4. Fee Agreement. There has been presented before this City Council a form
of Fee Agreement, to be dated on or after June 1, 2015 (the “Fee Agreement”), proposed to be
entered into between the City and Park Nicollet. Pursuant to the Fee Agreement, Park Nicollet
will agree to pay the City’s administrative fee for conduit bond financings set forth in Part II,
paragraph 9 of the City’s Private Activity Revenue Bond Financing Policy, effective as of
February 26, 2001.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6a) Page 7
Title: Refunding of Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Host Approval
Section 5. Approval.
(a) The City Council hereby approves the issuance of the Refunding Bonds by the
Issuer to, among other things, refinance the St. Louis Park Facilities through the defeasance,
redemption, and prepayment of the Series 2008C Bonds and the Series 2009 Bonds, subject to
final approval by the Board of Commissioners of the Issuer, following the preparation of bond
documents and a determination by the Issuer to issue the Refunding Bonds.
(b) The Fee Agreement is hereby in all respects authorized, approved and confirmed
and the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the
Fee Agreement for and on behalf of the City in substantially the form now on file with the City
but with such modifications as shall be deemed necessary, desirable or appropriate, their
execution thereof to constitute conclusive evidence of their approval of any and all modifications
therein.
Section 6. Costs. Park Nicollet will pay and upon demand, reimburse the City for
payment of, any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the refinancing of the St.
Louis Park Facilities and the issuance of the Refunding Bonds, whether or not the Refunding
Bonds are issued.
Section 7. Effective Date. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after
its passage.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: The Shoreham - Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Right-of-
Way
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve First
Reading of an Ordinance vacating right-of-way and set the Second Reading of Ordinance for
June 1, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the right-of-way needed for public purposes?
SUMMARY: The Shoreham redevelopment site is located at 3907 and 3915 Highway 7, 3031
Glenhurst Avenue, and 3914 and 3918 31st Street West. The redevelopment proposal includes a
preliminary and final plat that will combine six parcels into one parcel, and a preliminary and
final planned unit development (PUD) for a mixed use development including 150 residential
units, 10,000 square feet of office and 10,000 square feet of medical office space.. Final plat and
final PUD actions are on the City Council’s agenda this evening. In order for building permits to
be issued, right-of-way on the property needs to be vacated.
The applicant requests the City vacate alley right-of-way, lying between the County State Aid
Highway 25 Frontage Road and West 31st Street, connecting France Avenue to Glenhurst
Avenue. The development plan proposes using this right-of-way for an access drive and surface
parking area for the office tenants.
Legal description and depiction of the subject area is included in the attached ordinance.
A public hearing is required and a second reading of the ordinances will be scheduled for June 1,
2015.
Five councilmembers must support the ordinance in order to vacate right-of-way.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Ordinance
Prepared by: Ryan Kelley, Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6b) Page 2
Title: The Shoreham - Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance Vacating Right-of-Way
ORDINANCE NO. 15-____
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE VACATING AN ALLEY
LYING BETWEEN CSAH 25 FRONTAGE ROAD
AND 31ST STREET WEST WHICH CONNECTS
FRANCE AVENUE AND GLENHURST AVENUE
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. A petition in writing signed by a majority of all of the owners of all
property abutting upon both sides of the alley proposed to be vacated has been duly filed. The
notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on May 7, 2015 and the
City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the alley
is not needed for public purposes, and that it is for the best interest of the public that said alley be
vacated.
Section 2. The following described alley, as now dedicated and laid out within the
corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated:
That part of the alley lying northerly of Block 2, as dedicated in the recorded plat of
Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., lying westerly of the northerly extension of the east
line of Lot 1, Block 2, said plat, and lying easterly of the northerly extension of the West
line of Lot 7, Block 2, said plat.
Section 3. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this ordinance in
the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Section_4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Public Hearing May 18, 2015
First Reading May 18, 2015
Second Reading June 1, 2015
Date of Publication June 11, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect June 26, 2015
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 6c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Westside Center – Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Vacating Public
Easements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve First
Reading of the Ordinance Vacating Utility Easements and Reestablishment of a Property Line
Easement and set Second Reading for June 1st, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are the utility easements to be vacated needed for a public
purpose?
SUMMARY: Westside Center is located at 5320 West 23rd Street. COB, LLC (Owner) is in the
process of completing a major renovation of the former Nestle/Novartis site into a multi-tenant
office/industrial building which began in early 2014. Currently, over 75% of the 250,000 square
foot building has been leased to five tenants. At full occupancy, there is potential for up to
twelve tenants to occupy the building.
The development entails relocation of utilities, reconfiguration of parking, and grading work for
stormwater management. The Owner is proposing to build an expansion to the building to
provide more space and storage for Lyman Lumber. In order for the expansion to happen,
certain easements need to be vacated.
The applicant is requesting the vacation of utility easements that are no longer needed and not
aligned with the new utility locations. The site will still retain the 10 foot easements along their
property line. The proposed vacation does not affect any public City utilities, as the existing
utilities are private and only service the Westside Center. Further, engineering staff has stated
that the utilities do not serve a public purpose. Therefore, staff supports the proposed vacations.
A condition of approval will be that the ordinance shall not be effective until the Owner has
resolved the relocation issues with Xcel Energy and Comcast and is accepted by the City.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Ordinance
Site Location Map
Easement Map
Prepared by: Alex Boyce, Community Development Intern
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6c) Page 2
Title: Westside Center – Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Vacating Public Easements
ORDINANCE NO. 15-____
AN ORDINANCE VACATING EASEMENTS
5320 West 23rd Street
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. A petition in writing signed by a majority of all of the owners of all
property abutting upon both sides of the public storm sewer, water main, drainage and utility
easements proposed to be vacated has been duly filed. The notice of said petition has been
published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on May 7, 2015 and the City Council has conducted a
public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the public storm sewer, water main,
drainage and utility easements are not needed for public purposes, and that it is for the best
interest of the public that said easements be vacated.
Section 2. The following described public storm sewer, water main, drainage and
utility easements as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St.
Louis Park, are vacated:
PARCEL 1:
Lot 1, Block 1, Novartis Addition, except that part thereof embraced within the plat of
Ridge Addition, also except that part of the most northwesterly 80 feet of said Lot 1
lying southwesterly of the southerly right of way line of the Burlington Northern Inc.
Railroad, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
(Torrens Property, Certificate of Title No.1057969)
PARCEL2:
That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Novartis Addition, embraced within the plat of Ridge
Addition; and that part of the most northwesterly 80 feet of said Lot 1, lying
southwesterly of the southerly right of way line of the Burlington Northern Inc. Railroad,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
(Abstract Property)
Section 3. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this ordinance in
the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Sec.4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Public Hearing May 18, 2015
First Reading May 18, 2015
Second Reading June 1, 2015
Date of Publication June 11, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect June 26, 2015
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6c) Page 3
Title: Westside Center – Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Vacating Public Easements
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6c) Page 4
Title: Westside Center – Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Vacating Public Easements
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 6c) Page 5
Title: Westside Center – Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance Vacating Public Easements
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Discussion Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to
Breweries
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the first reading of an Ordinance amending
City Code Sec. 3-57 to increase the maximum number of barrels of malt liquor able to be
produced annually, and an Ordinance amending Business Park and Industrial Park Zoning
Districts pertaining to breweries, and to set the second reading for June 1, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council support the liquor ordinance and zoning text
amendments to increase the production capacity for breweries?
SUMMARY: Steel Toe Brewing requested an amendment to the Zoning Code to increase the
maximum amount of malt liquor a brewery can produce annually from 3,500 barrels to 20,000
barrels in the Business Park (BP) and Industrial Park (IP) Zoning Districts. In order to keep the
production limits for breweries consistent throughout the code, an amendment is also required to
the current liquor licensing provisions contained in City Code Sec. 3-57(13) and City Code
Sec. 3-57(14).
St. Louis Park has one brewery (Steel Toe) operating a taproom and selling malt liquor for off-
site consumption. Steel Toe is located in the Beltline Industrial Park at 4848 35th Street W,
which is zoned Business Park. Current liquor and zoning regulations limit the maximum
production capacity to 3,500 barrels per year. This maximum was consistent with the limits
established by Minnesota Statutes regulating breweries for off-site sales and taprooms. MN
Statutes, however, were recently amended to increase the maximum production capacity from
3,500 barrels per year to 20,000 barrels per year for breweries with off-sale malt liquor sales.
This amendment means the state now allows a brewer, who brews less than 20,000 (previously
3,500) barrels of malt liquor in a year, to sell product brewed by the brewer for consumption off-
premise. All other statutory regulations and requirements related to breweries for off-site sales
and taprooms remain in place.
On April 15, 2015, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for the requested zoning
amendment. No one was present to speak, and the Planning Commission recommended approval
(4-0) of the ordinance as presented.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 3, Sec. 57
Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 36, Sec. 233
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes
Letter from Jason Schoneman, Founder, Steel Toe Brewery
Minnesota Statute 340A.301 Subd. 6d (d)
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to Breweries
DISCUSSION
ANALYSIS:
Steel Toe Brewing has been operating as a small craft brewery since 2011. Jason Schoneman,
owner of Steel Toe Brewing, anticipates he will need to produce more than 3,500 barrels per year
in the coming years to fulfill increasing demands for his product and would like the City to
establish production limits that are consistent with what is allowed by State law.
PROPOSED ZONING AMENDMENT:
The proposed amendment increases the maximum production capacity for Breweries in the
Business Park and Industrial Park zoning districts from 3,500 barrels per year to 20,000 barrels
per year.
While Steel Toe is currently the only brewery in St. Louis Park, the proposed change would
apply to any new brewery to locate in the Business Park and Industrial Park zoning districts.
IMPACT:
The Applicant states that the increase in production is not significant enough to noticeably
change the amount of truck traffic coming to and from the site. All liquor produced is sold to a
distributor, not directly to individual end users (restaurants and liquor stores); therefore, there are
a limited number of trucks coming to the site. Since Steel Toe is only producing 3,500 barrels
per year, the distributor’s trucks are leaving the site with a partial load. If production is
increased to 20,000 barrels per year, the same trucks will simply leave with a bigger delivery.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Title: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to Breweries
ORDINANCE NO.15-____
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3, SECTION 57 OF THE
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE INCREASING PRODUCTION CAPACITY FOR
BREWER OFF-SALE MALT LIQUOR LICENSES AND BREWER TAPROOM
LICENSES
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Chapter 3 is amended as follows:
ARTICLE II. SALE, CONSUMPTION AND DISPLAY
DIVISION 2. LICENSES
***
Sec. 3-57. Classifications.
***
(13) Brewer off sale malt liquor license. A brewer who has a license from the
Commissioner of Public Safety to brew 3,500 20,000 barrels of malt liquor per year may with the
approval of the Commissioner of Public Safety be issued a license by the City for off-sale of
malt liquor subject to the following conditions:
a. The malt liquor sold off-sale must be produced and packaged on the licensed
premises.
b. Off-sale of malt liquor shall be limited to the legal hours for off-sale pursuant to
section 3-105.
c. The malt liquor sold off-sale shall be packaged in 64-ounce containers commonly
known as “growlers” or in 750 milliliter bottles and shall have the following
requirements for packaging:
1) The containers or bottles shall bear a twist type closure, cork, stopper or plug.
2) At the time of sale, a paper or plastic adhesive band, strip or sleeve shall be
applied to the container or bottle and extend over the top of the twist type
closure, cork, stopper or plug forming a seal that must be broken upon
opening of the container or bottle.
3) The adhesive band, strip or sleeve shall bear the name and address of the
brewer/licensee selling the malt liquor.
4) The containers or bottles shall be identified as malt liquor, contain the name of
the malt liquor, bear the name and address of the brewer/licensee selling the
malt liquor, and the contents in the container packaged as required herein shall
be considered intoxicating liquor unless the alcoholic content is labeled as
otherwise in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Rules, part
7515.1100.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Title: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to Breweries
***
(14) Brewer taproom license. A brewer who has a license from the Commissioner of Public
Safety to brew up to 3,500 20,000 barrels of malt liquor per year may be issued a license by the
City for on-sale of malt liquor subject to the following conditions:
a. The malt liquor sold on sale for consumption must be produced by the brewer on
the licensed premises
b. No other beverages containing alcohol may be sold or consumed on the licensed
premises
c. A brewer may only have one taproom license.
d. Hours of operation for on-sale of malt liquor at a brewer taproom shall be within the
following hours:
Monday - Thursday 3:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.
Friday 3:00 p.m. – 10:00 p.m.
Saturday 11:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.
Sunday 11:00 a.m. – 8:00 p.m.
Federally Recognized Holidays 11:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.
e. A restaurant is not allowed at a brewery with a taproom license.
***
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its passage and
publication.
Public Hearing April 15, 2015
First Reading May 18, 2015
Second Reading June 1, 2015
Date of Publication June 11, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect June 26, 2015
ADOPTED this ______ day of _______________, 2015, by the City Council of the City
of St. Louis Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council June 1, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Title: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to Breweries
ORDINANCE NO.15-____
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 36 OF THE
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE INCREASING PRODUCTION CAPACITY FOR
BREWERIES LOCATED IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK AND BUSINESS PARK
ZONING DISTRICTS
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Chapter 36 is amended to add the following:
ARTICLE IV. ZONING DISTRICTS
DIVISION 7. BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT REGULATIONS
***
Sec. 36-233. BP business park district.
***
(c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in any BP district may be used for one
or more of the following uses if it has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 1.0 and complies with
the performance standards as stated in Section 36-232 and the conditions stated below:
***
(2) Brewery. The conditions are as follows:
a. The brewery shall not produce more than 3,500 20,000 barrels of malt liquor per
year.
b. Up to 25% of the gross floor area of the Brewery may be used for any
combination of retail and a taproom.
***
DIVISION 8. INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS*
***
Sec. 36-243. I-P industrial park district.
***
(c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an I-P district may be used for one
or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated in section 36-242 and
those specified for the use permitted in this subsection:
***
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Title: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to Breweries
(11) Brewery. The conditions are as follows:
a. The brewery shall not produce more than 3,500 20,000 barrels of malt liquor per
year.
b. Up to 15% of the gross floor area of the Brewery may be used for any
combination of retail and a taproom.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its passage and
publication.
Public Hearing April 15, 2015
First Reading May 18, 2015
Second Reading June 1, 2015
Date of Publication June 11, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect June 26, 2015
ADOPTED this ______ day of _______________, 2015, by the City Council of the City
of St. Louis Park.
Adopted by the City Council June 1, 2015
Reviewed for Administration
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 7
Title: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to Breweries
EXCERPT OF OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 15, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells
3. Public Hearings
A. Brewery Taproom – Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Applicant: Steel Toe Brewery
Case No.: 15-14-ZA
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The proposed
amendment would increase the maximum amount a brewery can produce from 3,500
barrels per year to 20,000 barrels per year in the Business Park (BP) and Industrial Park
(IP) Zoning Districts.
Commissioner Tatalovich asked if the request was made to make it more in line with
Minnesota statute or if the applicant is coming up against the 3,500 barrel maximum.
Mr. Morrison responded that the applicant hasn’t reached the 3,500 barrel maximum yet.
They have nearly doubled their space, including the taproom. They are experiencing a
high demand for their product.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the hearing. As no one was present wishing to
speak, she closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson remarked that the amendment is keeping up with state law. He
said Steel Toe Brewing is a great asset to the community.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Zoning
Ordinance Amendment pertaining to Breweries in the Industrial Park and Business Park
zoning districts. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed
on a vote of 4-0.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 8
Title: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to Breweries
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 9
Title: 1st Reading of Liquor Ordinance Amendment and Zoning Text Amendment Related to Breweries
Minnesota Statute 340A.301 Subd. 6d (d)
Subd. 6d.Small brewer license.
(d) A municipality may not issue a license under this subdivision to a brewer if the brewer
seeking the license, or any person having an economic interest in the brewer seeking the license
or exercising control over the brewer seeking the license, is a brewer that brews more than
20,000 barrels of its own brands of malt liquor annually or a winery that produces more than
250,000 gallons of wine annually.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary/Final
Plat of Minnota Addition.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the plat consistent with the Subdivision Ordinance?
SUMMARY:
Request: Mr. Erdogan Akguc (Applicant) is requesting approval of a combined Preliminary and
Final Plat of Minnota Addition. The plat combines approximately 44,977 sf of unplatted
property with 3,600 sf of land from the neighboring townhome development (Cedar Trails
West).
Plat: The proposed plat meets all zoning and subdivision ordinance requirements.
Proposed Development: If the plat is approved, the Applicant intends to construct one townhome
building with 16 two-level dwelling units. Eight units will face Cedar Lake Rd, the other eight
units will face the railroad. A copy of the proposed site plan and building elevations are
attached.
Zoning: The property is zoned High-Density Multiple-Family Residence (RC). The proposed
development meets the zoning regulations and does not require additional Council approval such
as a Conditional Use Permit or Planned Unit Development. The building will be reviewed by
staff through the building permit process.
Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted on April 7, 2015.
Approximately ten residents reviewed the plat and proposed development. No concerns were
expressed.
Planning Commission: A public hearing was conducted by the Planning Commission on April
15, 2015. No comments were received, and Planning Commission recommended approval (4-0).
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Draft Resolution
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes
Aerial Photo
Preliminary/Final Plat
Proposed Development Plan
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
DISCUSSION
ANALYSIS:
Comprehensive Plan: Office
Zoning: High-Density Multiple-Family Residence (RC)
Description of Request:
The applicant requests approval of a combined Preliminary and Final Plat that plats a currently
unplatted property, and combines with approximately 3,600 sf of land subdivided from the
neighboring townhome development (Cedar Trails West).
Location:
Background:
The subject property is located in the Cedarhurst Neighborhood.
The property was previously occupied by an office building. The building was sometimes
referred to as the “tent” building because of its unique roof that looked like several tent peaks.
The building was removed in 2010, and the parcel has been vacant since. A picture of the
building is shown below, along with an aerial photo taken shortly before it was removed (above).
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 3
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
Existing Conditions:
The property is vacant and unplatted. It is approximately 44,977 square feet in area, and is flat
with some trees along the south property line.
There are two curb cuts on Cedar Lake Rd. One provides access to a small parking lot on the
west side of the property. The parking lot is left over from the office building that previously
occupied the property. The other curb cut provided access for the service area of the old
building, now the curb cut does not have a purpose.
Preliminary Plat:
Lot Size: The proposal is to plat an unplatted parcel, and combine with approximately 3,600
square feet subdivided from the neighboring property to the east (Cedar Trails West) which is a
townhome development. The existing parcel is irregularly shaped, and the additional property
will address part of the odd shape, thereby, making the property better suited for development.
The property is zoned RC High-Density Multiple-Family Residence. The minimum lot size for
this district is 15,000 square feet. There is only one lot proposed in the plat, and right-of-way
will be dedicated for Cedar Lake Road. Additional details are shown in the table below:
Sidewalk: The subdivision ordinance requires a sidewalk be constructed along all public streets
when a property is platted. Therefore, a sidewalk will be constructed along the south side of
Cedar Lake Road. There is currently a trail extending to the property from the west. From there,
it crosses to the north side of Cedar Lake Road and continues east. The sidewalk that is required
by this plat will tie into the trail and continue east on the south side of Cedar Lake Road.
Existing Conditions:
Existing Parcel Size, including right-of-way (r.o.w.): 44,977 sf
Proposed land purchase from neighbor 3,600 sf
Total land size: 48,577 sf
Proposed Plat:
Lot 1: 37,722 sf
Proposed Cedar Lake Rd r.o.w. dedication: 10,855 sf
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 4
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
Park & Trail Dedication: The plat is subject to the park dedication of $1,500 per dwelling unit
and trail dedication of $225 per dwelling unit. The applicant is proposing a townhome building
containing up to 16 dwelling units for a total of $24,000 for park dedication and $3,600 for trail
dedication.
Cedar Trails West: Cedar Trails West is the name of the townhome association located to the
east. This is the development the applicant proposes to purchase land from. Cedar Trails West
has sufficient land to maintain all zoning requirements after the proposed land transfer to the
Minnota Addition Plat. Cedar Trails West Association supports the proposed application.
The Cedar Trails West property is zoned R-4 Multiple Family Residence, and the maximum
density allowed is 30 units per acre. The existing lot size is 2.72 acres which allows up to 81
units. After the land transfer, the lot size will be reduced to 2.63 acres which allows up to 78
units. There are 16 dwelling units located on this parcel, well below the allowed maximum even
after the land is transferred.
The proposed property line located between the Minnota Addition and Cedar Trails West will
meet the minimum setback for the existing townhome located in Cedar Trails West. The
property line will be located 11 feet, 4 inches from the existing townhome, and the required
minimum setback is half the building height, which is 10 feet, 8 inches.
Proposed Development Plan:
If the plat is approved, the applicant intends to construct a townhome building on the parcel. The
townhome will be similar in size to the townhomes to the east.
The proposed townhome building can be approved administratively with a building permit.
Therefore, the only approval required is the application for the Minnota Addition plat. That
being said, staff will ensure that the proposed building meets all zoning requirements and that the
proposal is presented at the neighborhood meeting and is summarized with this presentation.
The building will consist of up to 16 two-level townhome units. Each dwelling unit will have a
private entrance directly from the outside. Each unit will also have a private underground garage
with stairs providing private access directly into the dwelling unit.
The development requires at least 4,526 square feet of Designed Outdoor Recreation Area
(DORA), and 5,718 square feet will be provided to the east of the building. The DORA will be
improved with play equipment and sidewalks leading to it. The DORA will also be made
available to the Cedar Trails West development with a sidewalk leading into the development.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 5
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT
OF MINNOTA ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Erdogan Akguc, owner and subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as
Minnota Addition has submitted an application for approval of preliminary and final plat of said
subdivision in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code,
and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder.
2. The proposed preliminary and final plat has been found to be in all respects
consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of
Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park.
3. The proposed preliminary and final plat is situated upon the following described
lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit:
That part of the Southeast ¼ of Section 30 and that part of the Northeast ¼ of the
Northwest ¼ of Section 31, Township 29, Range 24, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, described as follows:
Commencing at a point in the North line of the Northeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼ of
said Section 31, distant 522 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof; thence
South parallel with the West line of said Northeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼ 21.5 feet
to the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence
continuing South along said parallel line 125.4 feet more of less to the
Northwesterly right of way line of the Great Northern Railway; thence
Northeasterly along said right of way line to the North line of said Section 31;
thence West along the North line of said Section 31 to a point therein distant 204
feet East of the initial point of commencement; thence North parallel with the
West line of the Southeast ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of said Section 30 a distance of
107.5 feet; thence Southwesterly in a straight line to the actual point of beginning,
Except that part of the Northeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼ of Section 31, Township
29, Range 24, which lies Westerly of the following described line: Commencing
at the Northwest corner of said Northeast ¼ of the Northwest 1/4; thence on an
assumed bearing of South 89 degrees 38 minutes 24 seconds East along the North
line of said Northeast ¼ of the Northwest ¼ a distance of 523.80 feet to the point
of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 02 degrees 25 minutes 06
seconds East a distance of 146.04 feet to the northeasterly right-of-way line of
said Great Northern Railway and there terminating. (Abstract Property)
And that Cedar Trails West Homeowners Association, INC., a Minnesota Corporation,
fee owner of the following described property situated in the State of Minnesota, County
of Hennepin to wit:
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 6
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
That part of Lot 97, Cedar Trails West, according to the recorded plat thereof,
Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies Southwesterly of the following
described line:
Beginning at a point on the southerly line of said Lot 97, distant 80.03 East of the
Southwest corner thereof, as measured along said southerly line; thence
Northwesterly to a point on the Northwesterly line of said Lot 97, distant 35.77
feet Northeasterly of the Northwest corner of said Lot 97, as measured along said
Northwesterly line, and said line there terminating. (Torrens Property)
Conclusion
The proposed preliminary and final plat of Minnota Addition is hereby approved and accepted by
the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the
City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, provided, however, that this
approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk
subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the City signing the final plat, and the start of land disturbing activities:
a. A financial guarantee shall be submitted to the City for the construction of a public
sidewalk along the entire north property line along Cedar Lake Road.
b. Park dedication in the amount of $1,500 per dwelling unit shall be submitted to the City.
c. Trail dedication in the amount of $225 per dwelling unit shall be submitted to the City.
2. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any
condition of this approval.
3. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the
above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein.
4. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein,
and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the
City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth in Paragraph No. 1 above
and the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code have been fulfilled.
5. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section
26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper
compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described
and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality.
The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the
Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 7
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
EXCERPT OF OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 15, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 6:08 p.m. by Vice Chair Johnston-Madison.
3. Public Hearings
B. Preliminary and Final Plat of Minnota Addition
Location: 4903 Cedar Lake Road S.
Applicant: Erdogan Akguc
Case No.: 15-09-S
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report.
The applicant, Erdogan Akguc, stated that he has owned the property for 10 years and he
is looking forward to building on it.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the public hearing. As no one was present
wishing to speak, she closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Carper made a motion recommending approval of the Preliminary/Final
Plat of Minnota Addition, subject to conditions. Commissioner Robertson seconded the
motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 8
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake Road
AERIAL PHOTO
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake RoadPage 9
Traverse PCCity Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake RoadPage 10
Traverse PCCity Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake RoadPage 11
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake RoadPage 12
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake RoadPage 13
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake RoadPage 14
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake RoadPage 15
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat of Minnota Addition - 4903 Cedar Lake RoadPage 16
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
• Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary and Final Plat, with Subdivision
Variance, of The Shoreham Addition with conditions.
• Motion to approve First Reading of the Ordinance creating Section 36-268-PUD 1 and
amending the Zoning Map from C-2 General Commercial and R-4 Multiple Family
Residence to PUD 1 for properties at: 3907 and 3915 Highway 7, 3031 Glenhurst
Avenue, and 3914 and 3918 31st Street West to PUD and to set the Second Reading of
Ordinance for June 1, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve the Final Plat? Does the
City Council wish to rezone the property to “Planned Unit Development” to allow the proposed
development to occur?
SUMMARY: Bader Development is requesting a Preliminary and Final Plat and a Preliminary
and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the properties between France Avenue and
Glenhurst Avenue, and the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 25 Frontage Road and 31st Street
West. Approval would allow construction of a mixed-use building that includes 150 residential
units, for a density of 66 units per acre, and 20,000 square feet of general office and medical
office uses. All existing buildings would be removed. The new building would be five stories
along the CSAH 25 Frontage Road and three stories along 31st Street West. The site plan
includes new sidewalks on all four sides of the development and includes on-site storm water
management, outdoor recreation areas and landscaping. The development also includes surface
and underground parking for the residential units and the office tenants. The PUD is a rezoning
of the property under the City’s new PUD ordinance. Approval of the Final PUD requires a
supermajority of the full City Council (five of the seven members). Staff will provide a copy of
the Planning Development Contract at the Second Reading for Council approval.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat with
Subdivision Variance, and Preliminary and Final PUD, subject to conditions, at its May 6, 2015
meeting.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: To be determined. The developer has
requested City Assistance. The request is under review and is scheduled to be discussed at the
Economic Development Authority meeting June 1, 2015.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is a connected and engaged community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Ordinance
Development Plans
Prepared by: Ryan Kelley, Associate Planner
Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 2
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The proposed redevelopment site lies in the very eastern side of the City
adjacent to the Minneapolis municipal boundary. The site is bordered by France Avenue and
Glenhurst Avenue, and the CSAH 25 Frontage Road and 31st Street West. The site includes six
parcels which house: two single-family homes, a duplex, a parking lot, Battlefield Memorabilia
Store and ASAP Printing.
Currently, the Minneapolis-St. Louis Park
Municipal Boundary extends approximately
down the centerline of France Avenue in this
area. France Avenue presently exists as a
typical city street from CSAH 25 to the
Frontage Road, lying in the right of way
(ROW) of both Minneapolis and St. Louis
Park. As the street extends south of the
Frontage Rd, it is paved only in the St. Louis
Park ROW and turns into the alley behind the
ASAP building.
Bader Development has requested approval of
a Preliminary and Final Plat, Preliminary and
Final PUD and Alley Vacation for a mixed-use
development on the south side of the CSAH 25
Frontage Road. The proposed development
would remove all existing buildings and redevelop the site with 150 residential units, 10,000
square feet of office space and a 10,000 square foot medical office. The site is relatively flat,
except for the southern portion of the site, adjacent to 31st St, where there is approximately 13
feet of grade change up toward 31st.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat, with
Subdivision Variance, subject to conditions, and the Preliminary and Final Plat, subject to
conditions, on May 6, 2015. An excerpt of the draft meeting minutes are attached for your
information.
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Site Area: 2.23 acres
Current Zoning: C-2 General Commercial and R-4 Multiple-Family
Proposed Zoning: PUD-Planned Unit Development
Comprehensive Plan: M-X Mixed Use
Current Use: Commercial, Retail, Single-Family and Two-Family Residential
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT WITH VARIANCE ANALYSIS:
Description
The developer requests a preliminary and final plat to combine eight parcels into one single
parcel, for 2.23 acres known as “The Shoreham Addition.” The plat also includes reconstruction
of France Avenue adjacent to the development. The lot in the proposed plat meets all subdivision
requirements for minimum lot size, shape, and dimension.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 3
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
Uses
The proposed uses on the plat include multi-family residential, office and medical office, all of
which will be allowed through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) rezoning.
Utility Easements
The plat provides 10-foot wide drainage and utility easements adjacent to all public streets
except for a portion on the southeast side of the site along France Avenue. Drainage and utility
easements are also provided over the access locations to the underground storm water
management system.
A subdivision variance is requested to reduce the drainage and utility easement from 10 feet to 3
feet wide, for approximately 115 feet along France Avenue in the southeast portion of the site, as
indicated on the final plat. The developer provided the following arguments to support the
request for the subdivision variance:
1. The proposed improvements in the France Avenue ROW and trail connection to 31st
Street exacerbated a grade change on the south and east side of the property. In the effort
to allow the connection of France Avenue, grades will be adjusted on the east side of the
property, raising them by nearly four feet from existing conditions at the street’s
connection to the projects on-grade parking and access to underground parking. This
change necessitated a higher and more robust retaining wall be located in this position to
allow access to the underground parking, requiring more room for its safe function of the
ramp and retaining wall.
2. The variance requested for the reduced D/U setback will not affect the health, safety or
welfare of the community or other properties in the area. There are additional options for
utilities around the site, including under the sidewalk and boulevard at the reduced
easement location.
3. The easement variance for the ramp and wall results from a grading issue and significant
topography changes. The elevation for these walk-up units on the south was raised to
allow for a potential future connection of France Avenue which significantly changes the
grade on the east side of the property and affects the height of the second level of the
building – due to the change in finished grade for the drive under portion of the building.
Because the drive under area is changed to accommodate a multi-use trail connection and
possible future changes to the France Avenue ROW, the existing grade at the curb cut
into the property was raised by nearly 4 feet from the existing condition.
4. The variance for the reductions in the drainage and utility easements are not contrary to
the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
City staff support the requested preliminary and final plat with variance based on the information
provided above. The overall site design provides a more pedestrian friendly development,
including underground parking, while providing the 10 foot easement in all other locations while
also providing building setbacks consistent with the neighborhood and allowing for significant
boulevard landscaping.
Alley Vacation
An alley currently runs through the site between France Ave and Glenhurst Ave. Bader
Development has applied for an alley vacation. The vacation allows the developer to construct a
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 4
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
driveway through the site with access to parking areas. The Public Hearing for the vacation
request is on this evening’s Council agenda. Construction of the buildings cannot proceed until
this easement is vacated.
Park & Trail Dedication
Park dedication fees that will be due for the proposed Shoreham Addition subdivision will be
$219,000. Trail dedication fees will be $32,850. The City will collect these fees prior to signing
the final plat. Staff’s recommendation of accepting cash-in-lieu of land was presented to The
Park and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) at its May 13, 2015 meeting. PRAC
concurred with the Staff recommendation.
Tree Preservation
Nearly all the existing trees on the site will be removed. The developer meets the City’s tree
replacement requirements.
PUD ANALYSIS:
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed-Use and the
current zoning map contemplates mixed-use and high-density residential development on the
property. The proposed PUD would create a new zoning district and zoning regulations for uses
and dimensional standards that are unique to this site and the proposed site and building plans.
The intent of the Mixed Use land use designation and the City’s Livable Communities design
principles is to create compact, pedestrian-scale, mixed-use buildings, typically with retail,
service or other commercial uses on the ground floor and residential or office uses on upper
floors. Mixed-use is intended to accommodate mixed-income housing, a mix of housing types on
the same block, and higher density development.
Staff finds that this site is suitable for the proposed mixed-use development and multiple-family
housing and meets many of the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The development will
follow the City’s Green Building Policy and will include 20% of the units as affordable to
households earning 50% of the area median income which provides a mixed-income
development and expands housing choices for the community. The site has convenient access to
good bus service, other services and businesses along Minnetonka Blvd, and is within walking
and biking distance of the SWLRT regional trail and future LRT Beltline and West Lake
stations.
The proposed development is a mixed-use building that promotes efficient use of the land,
existing infrastructure, and existing roadway system. The plan places the majority of the parking
under the building screened from view.
Building and Site Design Analysis: The PUD ordinance requires the City to find that the
quality of building and site design proposed will substantially enhance aesthetics of the site and
implement relevant goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the following
criteria shall be satisfied:
(1) The design shall consider the project as a whole, and shall create a unified environment
within project boundaries by ensuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient
vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and
design and efficient use of utilities.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 5
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
(2) The design of a PUD shall achieve compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses,
both existing and proposed, and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on
surrounding land uses and the potential adverse effects of the surrounding land uses on the PUD.
(3) A PUD shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy.
(4) The use of green roofs or white roofs and on-site renewable energy is encouraged.
ZONING ANALYSIS: The following table provides the development metrics. The property
will be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The proposed performance and
development standards, as indicated in the development plans, establish the development
requirements for this property if approved.
Zoning Compliance Table:
Factor Required Proposed Met?
Use Multiple-Family Residential,
Office and Medical Office
Multiple-Family Residential, Office and
Medical Office
Yes
Lot Area 2.0 acres 2.23 acres Yes
Height None with PUD 65 feet at CSAH 25 Frontage Road 32
feet at 31st Street
Yes
Building
Materials
Minimum of 60% Class I materials Minimum of 61%. Yes
Residential
Density
50 units per acre; more with a
PUD
66 units per acre Yes
Floor Area Ratio 1.5, None with PUD 1.83 Yes
Ground Floor
Area Ratio
N/A 0.27 Yes
Off-Street
Parking
Residential – 198
Office/Medical Office – 81*
Residential – 200
Office/Medical Office - 93
Yes
Bicycle Parking Residential – 167
Office/Medical Office - 9
Residential – 176
Office/Medical Office - 12
Yes
Open
Area/DORA
11,676 sq. ft.
(12% of gross lot area)
13,832 sq. ft.
(14.2% of gross lot area)
Yes
Landscaping See Landscaping section Yes
Setbacks None with PUD Varies from 18’ 6” – 25’ to building
wall. 3’ setback to retaining wall for
underground parking driveway on
southeast corner along France Ave.
10’ setback to retaining wall on
southwest corner along Glenhurst Ave.
Yes
Mechanical
Equipment
Full screening required Rooftop equipment has been placed in
center of building so as not visible
from off-site. See exhibits.
Yes
Sidewalks Required along all streets and
building frontages
Provided along all streets and building
frontages
Yes
Refuse handling Full screening required Within buildings Yes
Transit service None required Served by route 17 Yes
Stormwater
Management
Required Provided underground and includes
other best management practices
Yes
* Includes 10% Transit Reduction
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 6
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
Uses
The Shoreham Development includes multi-family residential, general office and medical office
uses. The applicant, Bader Development, intends to occupy the general office space. The
affected properties are currently zoned C-2 Commercial north of the existing alley to the CSAH
25 Frontage Rd and R-4 Multiple Family Residence south of the alley to W 31st St. A
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Guidance change from COM-Commercial and RM-Medium
Density Residential to M-X Mixed Use was approved by the City Council on January 20, 2015.
The proposed uses are consistent with the M-X Land Use Guidance, and a rezoning to PUD
permits such uses.
The PUD for this district will limit uses along W 31st St to multiple-family dwelling units.
General commercial, retail, office and medical office uses will be permitted north of the
driveway through the property. Specific uses on the site are governed by the PUD Zoning
Ordinance. The ordinance is attached to this report.
Architectural Design
The development plans all demonstrate a high quality image with design considerations
demonstrating sensitivity to the surrounding uses and character. The building is five stories
along the CSAH 25 Frontage Rd, with the second through fourth stories stepped back from the
front façade. The building is reduced to three stories along W 31st St which is more in character
with the residential context around this portion of the redevelopment site. Further attention was
given to creating a more pedestrian scale environment by providing multiple entrances to the
building from adjacent sidewalks, creating façade articulation to break up the mass of street
facing walls, the generous use of glass to provide transparency and locating the parking lot on
the interior of the site.
The building exteriors include a generous use of glass, brick and other quality materials. Glass,
stucco and brick are counted as Class I materials on all buildings. The City requires a minimum
of 60% Class I material coverage on each façade visible from off-site. The minimum Class I
material coverage is 61%, which is on an interior courtyard elevation. The minimum Class I
material coverage of the four primary exterior facades is 75%. The building exceeds City Code
architectural standards.
Parking
Residential: Parking is provided under almost the entirety of the building footprint with some
covered parking provided under the southernmost building along W 31st St. The City requires
one space per bedroom, for a total of 198 spaces. The applicant is providing 193 spaces plus nine
tandem spaces for a total of 202 spaces, meeting the City requirements. The applicant is also
providing secured bike storage located on both parking levels. The City’s bicycle parking
requirements are met.
Office: Office parking is provided in a surface lot on the interior of the site, as well as in the
covered parking area under the southernmost building along W 31st St and five dedicated spaces
in the underground level. The applicant also proposes six parking spaces in their “circle drive”
on the north side of the property and seven on-street parking stalls along France Ave adjacent to
the Shoreham site. The office and medical office vehicular parking requirements are exceeded by
three spaces. Bicycle parking will be provided along the northwest portion of the building and
exceeds the City’s requirements by three spaces.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 7
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
Access
The plan provides a driveway that connects east-west through the site between France Avenue
and Glenhurst Avenue and a circle driveway on the front side of the building off of the CSAH 25
Frontage Road. The driveway through the site provides access to the off-street parking areas that
primarily serve the non-residential uses. The access drive to the underground residential parking
is also off of this driveway. The circle driveway provides parking spaces that can be used for the
non-residential uses or residential guest parking. Parking on the west side of France Avenue can
also be used for residential and non-residential uses.
Traffic Study
A traffic study was completed when the applicant applied for a Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Amendment. The traffic study included an analysis of how the proposed development may
impact the overall number of vehicle trips in the area and turning movements and the level of
service of the following intersections: Glenhurst Ave/CSAH 25 Frontage Rd; France Ave/CSAH
25 Frontage Rd; France Ave/CSAH 25. The traffic study was updated to reflect the addition of
the medical office use. The updated study results indicate that the proposed development will
have a minimal impact on traffic compared to the existing uses. The level of service for each of
the studied intersections is not projected to change and the number of vehicle trips is projected to
increase over existing conditions as follows: 93 a.m. peak period, 110 p.m. peak period and
1,158 daily. The traffic study is attached to this report.
France Avenue
Currently, France Ave ROW exists in both Minneapolis and St. Louis Park connecting between
CSAH 25 and 31st Street. The actual pavement is essentially a driveway south of the CSAH 25
Frontage Road and is entirely in the St. Louis Park ROW. France Ave does not connect to 31st
St, but extends approximately half-way down this block, and then curves behind the ASAP
Building, at 3907 Hwy 7, and connects to an alley. This street segment has two-way traffic and
haphazard parking on both sides, which is used by the apartment building on the east side of
France Ave, in Minneapolis. The current configuration would not be allowed with the Shoreham
Development project due to the width of this roadway segment, the limited access to the site in
relation to the proposed development, traffic circulation and a lack of pedestrian and bike
connectivity.
France Ave needs to be reconstructed to provide minimum lane widths for vehicular travel, and
additionally, to contain City required sidewalks and boulevards, as well as bike facilities. France
Avenue will be reconstructed using approximately 11 feet of ROW in Minneapolis. This will
allow two vehicle travel lanes, on-street parking on the west side of France Avenue, a six foot
boulevard and six foot sidewalk between the CSAH 25 Frontage Road and the end point of
France Avenue just south of the drive entrance to The Shoreham. An eight foot multi-use trail
will connect from the end of France Avenue to 31st Street West. France Avenue will therefore be
a dead-end, privately maintained street, essentially functioning as a private driveway. A privately
maintained France Avenue will connect to the Shoreham driveway of which the general public
may use to “turn-around”, or access Glenhurst Avenue. Bader Development understands this
scenario and language is included in the Planning Development Contract recognizing this
scenario and that access through the site is allowed to occur.
Loading/Service Areas
The development plans show that trash service areas are located within the building and parking
structure and fully screened from off-site. The number and size of loading areas for the office
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 8
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
meet City Code requirements. The move-in area is located on the east side of the building and
serves as the residential service access as well.
Landscaping
The landscape plan indicates 97 new trees, 648 shrubs and over 1,000 perennials and grasses.
The project exceeds the City’s minimum tree replacement calculations by providing 415 caliper
inches of trees when 346 caliper inches are required.
The base landscaping formula would require 209 trees and 1,068 shrubs to be planted based on
the development density for this site. The development relies upon the alternative landscaping
provisions of the zoning code.
The plan provides a number of alternative landscaping elements. Two of the more prominent
features are landscaped seating areas on the northwest and northeastern corners of the
development site providing an enhanced public realm adjacent to the pedestrian sidewalk along
the CSAH 25 Frontage Road. The area on the northeast corner of the site has been designed in a
manner intended to mark the round ASAP building which currently exists on the site. This
landscaped area is circular in nature and will contain a historical marker, of which details are to
be determined. The development also includes a large patio area with a number of amenities
including a pool, outdoor seating, and landscaping. Also, a private at-grade dog run will be
provided on the southwest corner of the site.
Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA)
The proposed development plans illustrate an integration of landscaping and DORA elements.
The elements provided to meet the City’s DORA requirements include a dog run on the
southeastern portion of the site, an open lawn area intended for unprogrammed activity, and a
private pool amenity area. The portion of the aforementioned landscaped historical marker area
that is located on the development property is also included in the DORA calculations. The plan
exceeds the City’s minimum 12% DORA requirement, providing 14.2% of the lot area.
Signage
A sign plan was not submitted for review. Signs will require permits and must comply with the
M-X zoning district standards.
Utilities
All small utilities will be placed underground. Utility service structures, such as a generator and
transformer, will be screened completely from off-site with materials consistent with main
building facade. Per the redevelopment agreement, buildings will also provide the necessary
infrastructure to take advantage of fiber-optic service lines in the vicinity of the development.
Historic Documentation
The existing “ASAP Building” has been found to be eligible for listing on the National Register
of Historic Places. This eligibility was discussed through the Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Amendment process related to the Shoreham Development. Through that process, the City
expressed an interest in having documentation performed for historic record. Bader Development
has received a Scope and Fee Budget from Preservation Design Works, LLC to provide such
documentation of the building. A condition of approval that requires completing this work prior
to the demolition of any existing buildings on the site is included in the Planning Development
Contract.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 9
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
PUBLIC INPUT:
A neighborhood meeting was held January 6, 2015 on the proposed project during the
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendment process. At that time there was some concern of the
neighborhood related to increased traffic and a concern of losing on-street parking. A number of
attendees also expressed their appreciation for reducing the building height to three stories along
W 31st Street and that they were excited for the redevelopment of these properties.
An additional meeting was held April 28, 2015 more specifically related to options for the
reconstruction of France Avenue, and the Public Hearing regarding the preliminary and final plat
and preliminary and final PUD was held May 6, 2015. Staff has received feedback from people
that both supported and opposed the extension of France Avenue to 31st Street. The general
reason for opposition has been a concern from residents living between France and Glenhurst of
increased traffic along 31st Street. The adjacent Minneapolis property owner is opposed to the
connection, both with a concern of increased traffic, and also due to their interest in Minneapolis
vacating a portion of the France Avenue ROW in the future so that the property owner can use it
for redevelopment. France Avenue will not connect to 31st Street West in association with this
redevelopment.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Existing and Proposed Zoning
• Plat Resolution
• PUD Ordinance
• Cover Sheet
• Final Plat
• Preliminary Plat
• Site Plan
• Construction Route/Parking
• Grading and Erosion Control
• Utility Plan
• Landscape Site Plan
• Architectural Site Plan
• A100 – Level P1 Floor Plan
• A110 – Level 1 Floor Plan
• A160 – Roof Plan
• A200 – Elevations
• A201 – Elevations
• A202 – Elevations
• A310 – Building Sections
• Historic Documentation Scope and Fee Budget
• Traffic Study
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 10
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
Existing and Proposed Zoning
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 11
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
RESOLUTION NO. 15-_____
RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF
THE SHOREHAM ADDITION
WITH VARIANCE FROM SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR 3907 AND 3915
HIGHWAY 7, 3031 GLENHURST AVENUE, AND 3914 AND 3918 31ST STREET WEST
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Bader Development, subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as The
Shoreham Addition has submitted an application for approval of preliminary and final plat of
said subdivision with a variance from the subdivision ordinance for reduced drainage and utility
easements (Section 26-154) in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park
Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder.
2. The proposed preliminary and final plat has been found to be in all respects
consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of
Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park.
3. The proposed plat is situated upon the following described lands in Hennepin
County, Minnesota, to-wit:
Parcel 1:
Lot 1, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 2:
The South 27 feet of Lot 10 and all of Lots 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15,
Also Lots 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, except the Westerly 100 feet thereof,
Also the South 27 feet of Lot 21, except the Westerly 100 feet thereof;
All in Block 2, Calhoun Lake Side Park, Minneapolis, Minn.;
And the North and South alley adjoining said Lots 16 through 20 and the South 27 feet of Lot 21,
vacated by Ordinance No. 591 adopted October 14, 1957, filed November 21, 1957, as
Document No. 3093976 in Book 791 of Misc., Page 313.
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Abstract Property
Parcel 3:
Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Torrens Property
Torrens Certificate No. 801865
Parcel 4:
The Westerly 100 feet of Lots 16 through 20 inclusive, and the Westerly 100 feet of the South 27
feet of Lot 21, all in Block 2, Calhoun Lake Side Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 12
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
Abstract Property
Parcel 5:
Lot 4, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 6:
Lot 5, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Abstract Property
Parcel 7:
Lots 6 and 7, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 8:
That part of the alley lying northerly of Block 2, as dedicated in the recorded plat of Manhattan
Park, Minneapolis, Minn., lying westerly of the northerly extension of the east line of Lot 1,
Block 2, said plat, and lying easterly of the northerly extension of the west line of Lot 7, Block 2,
said plat.
(to be platted as Lot 1, Block 1, The Shoreham Addition)
4. There are special circumstances affecting the property such that the strict
application of the provisions of the subdivision ordinance would deprive the applicant/owner of
the reasonable use of the land. Such circumstances arise due to the topography of the France
Avenue right-of-way and adjacent land, along with the related improvements required by the
City to France Avenue, required sidewalks and trail connections adjacent to the property.
5. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
and welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which the property is situated. The
variance still provides a three foot drainage and utility easement. Additionally, there is sufficient
room for utilities in the adjacent right-of-way under the six foot wide sidewalk and the six foot
wide boulevard. The reduced drainage and utility easement in this location allows for
underground parking to be built, providing for a more pedestrian oriented development.
6. The variance is not contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The
Comprehensive Plan calls for such lands to be redeveloped and to include certain elements, such
as walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods, human scale development and multi-modal streets and
pathways. Such redevelopment could not occur without a variance.
Conclusion
1. The proposed preliminary and final plat of The Shoreham Addition is hereby
approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City
plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota,
provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and
Certification by the City Clerk subject to the following conditions:
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 13
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
a. A variance is approved from the subdivision ordinance for a seven foot
reduction of the drainage and utility easement, along the southeast property
line, from the required ten feet, required by City Code, Section 26-154.
b. Park dedication fees totaling $219,000 and trail dedication fees totaling
$32,850 shall be paid to the City of St. Louis Park prior to the City signing the
final plat.
c. A financial security in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit in the
amount of $5,000 shall be submitted to the City to insure that a signed Mylar
copy of the final plat is provided to the City and that iron monuments are
placed at the property corners.
d. An easement for any part of the sidewalk along France Avenue that is outside
the existing right-of-way shall be granted to the City. Said easement shall be
in a form approved by the City Attorney and said easement shall be executed
prior to the City signing the final plat.
e. An agreement that specifies the Developer’s requirement to maintain all
sidewalks, boulevards, and trails adjacent to the development shall be
executed prior to the City signing the final plat.
f. An agreement that specifies the Developer’s obligations related to the
maintenance of France Avenue, adjacent to the development, shall be
executed prior to the City signing the final plat.
g. Developer shall enter into a Planning and Development Contract prior to the
City signing the final plat and prior to any land disturbing activities.
h. The on-site underground storm water management system shall be privately-
owned and privately maintained. Access to the system shall be provided to the
City for clean-out and inspection purposes when warranted. Access points
shall be covered by a drainage and utility easement, as provided on the final
plat.
i. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation
of any condition of this approval.
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution
to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein.
3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts
required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on
behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth in Paragraph
No. 1 above and the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code have been fulfilled.
4. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required
under Section 26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of
proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above
described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 14
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the
Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 15
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
ORDINANCE NO. ____-15
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY
CREATING SECTION 36-268-PUD 1 AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3907 AND 3915 HIGHWAY
7, 3031 GLENHURST AVENUE, AND 3914 AND 3918 31ST STREET WEST
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Findings
Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 15-11-S, 15-12-PUD and 15-13-VAC) for amending the Zoning
Ordinance to create a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District.
Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Mixed Use.
Sec. 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands
from C-2 General Commercial and R-4 Multiple Family Residence to PUD 1:
Lot 1, Block 1, The Shoreham Addition; Hennepin County, Minnesota; and
to the center line of all adjacent right-of-way.
Sec. 4. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the
following Planned Unit Development Zoning District:
Section 36-268-PUD 1.
(a) Development Plan
The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following
Final PUD signed Official Exhibits:
1. G000 – Cover Sheet
2. C1.01 – Title Sheet
3. C2.01 – Preliminary Plat
4. C2.02 – Construction Route/Parking
5. C3.01 – Site Plan
6. C4.01 – Grading and Erosion Control
7. C6.01 – Utility Plan
8. C8.01 – France Avenue Plan and Profile
9. L000 – Tree Preservation Plan
10. L100 – Landscape Site Plan
11. L101 – Planting Details
12. AS100 – Architectural Site Plan
13. A100 – Level P1 Floor Plan
14. A110 – Level 1 Floor Plan
15. A120 – Level 2 Floor Plan
16. A130 – Level 3 Floor Plan
17. A140 – Level 4 Floor Plan
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 16
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
18. A150 – Level 5 Floor Plan
19. A160 – Roof Plan
20. A200 – Elevations
21. A201 – Elevations
22. A202 – Elevations
23. A310 – Building Sections
24. Site Lighting Photometric Plan
25. Final Plat
26. Zoning Map Amendment Exhibit
The site shall also conform to the following requirements:
1) The property shall be divided into two zones, as indicated on Sheet AS100 of the
Official Exhibits. The zones shall be established by dividing the site into a north
side and south side. The north side shall be called Zone A and the south side shall
be called Zone B.
2) Parking will be provided off-street in a surface lot and structured parking, and
on-street in the circular driveway on the north side of the property. A total of
two-hundred-ninety (290) parking spaces will be provided: 200 spaces for
residential units and 90 spaces for non-residential uses.
3) The maximum building height in Zone A shall not exceed 65 feet and five
stories. The maximum building height in Zone B shall not exceed 35 feet and
three stories.
4) The development site shall include a minimum of 12 percent designed outdoor
recreation area based on private developable land area.
(b) Permitted Uses
Zone A
(1) Multiple-family dwellings.
Zone B
(1) Multiple-family dwellings. Dwelling units are not permitted on the first floor. Uses
associated with the multiple-family dwellings, including, but not limited to the
residential office, fitness facility, mail room, assembly rooms or general amenity
space are limited to a maximum of 50% of the building first floor.
(2) Commercial uses. Commercial uses are only permitted on the first floor, and are
limited to the following: office, medical or dental office, adult day care, group day
care/nursery school, group home/nonstatutory, banks without drive-up facilities,
food service, private entertainment (indoor), retail shops, service, showrooms and
studios.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 17
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
a. All parking requirements must be met for each use.
b. Hours of operation for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m.
c. No drive up facilities are allowed.
(3) Civic and institutional uses. Civic and institutional uses are limited to the
following: education/academic, library, museums/art galleries, indoor public
parks/open space, police service substations, post office customer service facilities,
public studios and performance theaters.
(c) Accessory Uses
Accessory uses are as follows:
(1) Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and
not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use.
(2) Home occupations complying with all of the conditions in the R-C district.
(3) Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery.
(4) No outdoor uses or storage allowed.
(d) Special Performance Standards
(1) All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall
be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design,
landscaping, parking and screening requirements.
(2) All trash handling and loading areas shall be inside of the building and screened
from view.
(3) Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the approved redevelopment plan or
final PUD site plan and development agreement in accordance with the following
conditions:
a. Pylon signs are prohibited;
b. Freestanding monument signs shall utilize the same exterior materials as
the principal buildings and shall not interfere with pedestrian, bicycle or
automobile circulation and visibility;
c. Pedestrian-scale signs visible from public sidewalks shall be no more than
three feet in vertical dimension unless flush with the building wall; and
d. Maximum allowable number, sizes and heights of signs shall be regulated
by section 36-362, C-2 requirements, except as may be specifically
modified by the final PUD.
e. Wall signs of non-residential uses shall only be placed on the ground
floor, exterior wall, of the occupied tenant lease space, and/or a monument
sign.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 18
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD
f. Wall signs shall not be included in calculating the aggregate sign area on
the lot if they meet the following outlined conditions:
1. Non-residential wall signs permitted by this section that do not
exceed seven percent of the exterior wall area of the ground floor
tenant lease space.
2. The sign is located on the exterior wall of the ground floor tenant
lease space from which the seven percent sign area was derived.
3. No individual wall sign shall exceed 80 square feet in area.
(4) Façade. The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground
floor non-residential facades located in Zone B:
a. For street-facing facades, no more than 10% of total window and door area
shall be glass block, mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass,
finishes or material including window painting and signage. The remaining
90% of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted glass, allowing
views into and out of the interior.
b. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum depth of three
feet. This requirement shall not prohibit the display of merchandise.
(5) Awnings.
a. Awnings must be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass.
Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited.
b. Backlit awnings are prohibited.
Sec. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 15-11-S, 15-12-PUD and 15-13-VAC are
hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this
case.
Sec. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Public Hearing May 6, 2015
First Reading May 18, 2015
Second Reading June 1, 2015
Date of Publication June 11, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect June 26, 2015
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council ___________
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
THE SHOREHAM3915 Hwy 7, Saint Louis Park, MNSITE MAPSITE LOCATIONUNIT SUMMARYTYPELEVEL 2LEVEL 3LEVEL 4LEVEL 5TOTALSTUDIO4443151 BEDROOM20212110721+ BEDROOM4443152 BEDROOM1010108382+ BEDROOM333110TOTALS41424225150PARKING AND BIKE RACK CALCULATIONSPARKING REQUIRED = 1 STALL PER BEDROOMUNITCOUNTBR / UNITBEDROOMSTOTAL PARKINGSTUDIO15115151 BEROOM72172721+ BEDROOM15115172 BEDROOM38276722+ BEDROOM1022020TOTALS150198198TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIRED198TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PARKING PROVIDED200OFFICE AREA = 10,000 GSFPARKING REQUIRED = 1 STALL PER 250 SFTOTAL OFFICE PARKING REQUIRED = 10,000/250 = 40MEDICAL OFFICE AREA = 10,000 GSFPARKING REQUIRED = 1 STALL PER 200 SFTOTAL MEDICAL OFFICE PARKING REQUIRED = 10,000/200 = 50REDUCTION IN PARKING FOR TRANSIT (10% OF REQ'D SPACES)-9TOTAL COMMERCIAL PARKING REQUIRED 81TOTAL COMMERCIAL PARKING PROVIDED (88 on grade and 5 below grade)93GRAND TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED279GRAND TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED293BIKE RACKS REQUIRED = 1/UNIT + 1/10 PARKING STALLS UNITS150PARKING SPACES293TOTAL REQUIRED (150+(279/10) = 178TOTAL BIKE RACKS PROVIDED (138 AT P1, 40 AT LEVEL 1)178COMMERCIAL BIKE RACKS PROVIDED12GRAND TOTAL BIKE RACKS PROVIDED190PROJECT TEAMDEVELOPERBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 55416ARCHITECTDJR Architecture, Inc.333 Washington Avenue NorthUnion Plaza, Suite 210Minneapolis, MN 55104Contact:Sheldon BergPhone: (612) 676-2700Fax: (612) 676-2796Email: sberg@djr-inc.comCONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALEricksen, Roed and Associates, Inc.2550 University Avenue West,Suite 201-SSt. Paul, MN 55114-1904Contact:Bill BullerPhone: (651) 251-7570MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Contact:Erik MillerPhone: (763) 476-6010LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTDamon Farber401 2nd Ave N Suite 410Minneapolis, MN 55401Contact:Tom Whitlock(612) 332-7522PROJECT NOTES1.All work shall comply with all applicablestate and local codes and ordinances.2.Work is to be completed in accordancewith all documents including drawings,specifications, and conditions ofcontract for work.3.Refer to complete set of issued contractdocuments including drawings andspecifications of all disciplines forapplicable notes, abbreviations, andsymbols. Contractor is responsible forcoordination of work. Notify Architect ofany discrepancies before proceedingwith work.4.Food service for coordination only. Foodservice equipment and installation not incontract.FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR) CALCULATIONSNAMEAREASITE 2.23 ACRES (97,297 SF)GROSS BUILDING178,283 GSFGROSS FOOTPRINT26,575 GSFFAR1.83GFAR0.27AREA BY USEOFFICE 10,000 GSFMEDICAL OFFICE 10,000 GSFMULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL158,283 GSFPARKING 79,632 GSFTOTAL UNDER COVER258,846 GSFARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321G000COVER SHEET3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15LMSBTHE SHOREHAMDesignerSHEET INDEXSheetNumberSheet NamePUD 03/02/2015PUD UPDATE 03/18/2015PUD FINAL COMMENTS 04/29/15AS12UnnamedG000COVER SHEET* * *PLATPLAT* *SURVEY SURVEY* *C1.01TITLE SHEET* * *C2.01PRELIMINARY PLAT* * *C3.01SITE PLAN* * *C4.01GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL * * *C6.01UTILITY PLAN* * *C8.01FRANCE AVENUE PLAN AND PROFILE * * *L000TREE PRESERVATION PLAN* *L100LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN* * *L101PLANTING DETAILS* * *AS100 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN* * *A100LEVEL P1 FLOOR PLAN*A110LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN* * *A120LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN* *A130LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN* *A140LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN* *A150LEVEL 5 FLOOR PLAN* *A160ROOF PLAN* *A200ELEVATIONS* *A201ELEVATIONS* *A202ELEVATIONS* *A310BUILDING SECTIONS* *SITE LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC PLAN* * *TRASH / RECYCLING AREA = 1,412 GSF1 PDR03/02/152 PUD UPDATE03/18/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 19
L O T 1
B L O C K 1
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Bader Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability
company, fee owner, of the following described property:
Parcel 1:
Lot 1, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 2:
The South 27 feet of Lot 10 and all of Lots 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15,
Also Lots 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, except the Westerly 100 feet thereof,
Also the South 27 feet of Lot 21, except the Westerly 100 feet thereof;
All in Block 2, Calhoun Lake Side Park, Minneapolis, Minn.;
And the North and South alley adjoining said Lots 16 through 20 and the South 27 feet of Lot 21, vacated by
Ordinance No. 591 adopted October 14, 1957, filed November 21, 1957, as Document No. 3093976 in Book
791 of Misc., Page 313.
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Abstract Property
Parcel 3:
Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Torrens Property
Torrens Certificate No. 801865
Parcel 4:
The Westerly 100 feet of Lots 16 through 20 inclusive, and the Westerly 100 feet of the South 27 feet of Lot
21, all in Block 2, Calhoun Lake Side Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 5:
Lot 4, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 6:
Lot 5, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Abstract Property
Parcel 7:
Lots 6 and 7, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 8:
That part of the alley lying northerly of Block 2, as dedicated in the recorded plat of Manhattan Park,
Minneapolis, Minn., lying westerly of the northerly extension of the east line of Lot 1, Block 2, said plat, and
lying easterly of the northerly extension of the west line of Lot 7, Block 2, said plat.
Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as THE SHOREHAM ADDITION.
In witness whereof said Bader Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, has caused these
presents to be signed by its proper officer this _______ day of ____________________, 20___.
Bader Developement, LLC
SIGNED:
By: , as
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of _________________, 20___, by
, of
Bader Development, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of said company.
Notary Public, County, Minnesota Notary Printed Name
My Commission Expires
I Rick M. Blom do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a
duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the
boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all
monuments depicted on this plat have been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries
and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are
shown and labeled on this Plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat.
Dated this day of , 20 .
Rick M. Blom, Licensed Land Surveyor
Minnesota License No. 21729
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of ____________________, 20___, by
Rick M. Blom.
Notary Public, County, Minnesota Notary Printed Name
My Commission Expires
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
This plat of THE SHOREHAM ADDITION was approved and accepted by the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, at a
regular meeting thereof held this ______ day of ____________________, 20___. If applicable, the written comments and
recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportation and the County Highway Engineer have been received by the
City or the prescribed 30-day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments and recommendations, as provided by
Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subdivision 2.
City Council, St. Louis Park, Minnesota
By: Mayor
By: Manager
RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICES, Hennepin County, Minnesota
I hereby certify that taxes payable in 20___ and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat, dated this
_______ day of _________________, 20___.
Mark V. Chapin, County Auditor
By: , Deputy
SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 383B.565 (1969), this plat
has been approved this _______ day of _________________, 20___.
Chris F. Mavis, County Surveyor
By:
REGISTRAR OF TITLES, Hennepin County, Minnesota
I hereby certify that the within plat of THE SHOREHAM ADDITION
was filed in this office this _______ day of _________________,
20___, at ______ o'clock ____ .M.
Martin McCormick, Registrar of Titles
By: , Deputy
COUNTY RECORDER, Hennepin County, Minnesota
I hereby certify that the within plat of THE SHOREHAM ADDITION
was filed in this office this _______ day of _________________,
20___, at ______ o'clock ____ .M.
Martin McCormick, County Recorder
By: , Deputy
ENGINEERING, PLANNING
AND LAND SURVEYING
SAMBATEK, INC.
THE SHOREHAM ADDITION
DENOTES 1/2 INCH BY 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT SET
AND MARKED BY LICENSE NO. 21729.
DENOTES 1/2 INCH IRON MONUMENT FOUND, UNLESS
OTHERWISE NOTED.
DENOTES SECTION CORNER
THE EAST LINE OF BLOCK 2, CALHOUN LAKE SIDE PARK
IS ASSUMED TO HAVE A BEARING OF SOUTH 00
DEGREES 59 MINUTES 07 SECONDS WEST.
0
SCALE IN FEET
0
SCALE IN FEET
30 60
R.T. DOC. NO.
C.R. DOC. NO.
BEING 10 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE
INDICATED, AND ADJOINING LOT LINES, AND
10 FEET IN WIDTH, UNLESS OTHERWISE
INDICATED, AND ADJOINING RIGHT-OF-WAY
LINES, AS SHOWN ON THE PLAT.
10
10
10
10
DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS ARE SHOWN THUS:
(NOT TO SCALE)
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 20
GLENHURST AVEFRANCE AVE S31ST ST W
HIGHWAY 7
(
C
O
R
D
N
O
2
5
)
L O T 1
B L O C K 1
0
SCALE IN FEET
30 60
FOUND MONUMENT
SET MONUMENT
MARKED LS 47476
ELECTRIC METER
LIGHT
SANITARY SEWER
STORM SEWER
WATERMAIN
BEEHIVE
ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER
AIR CONDITIONER
GUY ANCHOR
HANDICAP STALL
UTILITY POLE
POST
SIGN
TELEPHONE PEDESTAL
GAS METER
EASEMENT LINE
BUILDING LINE
CONCRETE CURB
BITUMINOUS SURFACE
CONCRETE SURFACE
GRAVEL SURFACE
DECIDUOUS TREE
CONIFEROUS TREE
OVERHEAD WIRE
CHAIN LINK FENCE
BLOCK WALL
STONE WALL
WOOD FENCE
LEGEND
VICINITY MAP
SITE100
MINNETONKA BLVD
MN 7 SER
VI
C
E
R
D
EXCELSIOR BLVDW 36TH ST BELTLINEW 31ST ST AVE SBLVD*5
3
17
3
LAKE
CALHOUNFRANCELIFT STATION
TRAFFIC LIGHT
HAND HOLE
GAS VALVE
GROUND LIGHT
UTILITY MANHOLE
YARD HYDRANT
SET MAG NAIL
Total Site Area: 97,297 Square Feet or 2.234 Acres
1.The bearing system is based on the east line of Block 2, CALHOUN LAKE SIDE PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.
having an assumed bearing of South 00 degrees 59 minutes 07 seconds West.
2. Subject property's addresses and property identification numbers are:
Parcel 1, 2 and 3:3907 Highway 7 06-028-24-11-0056
Parcel 4:3915 Highway 7 06-028-24-11-0007
Parcel 5:3914 31st St W 06-028-24-11-0014
Parcel 6:3918 31st St W 06-028-24-11-0015
Parcel 7:3031 Glenhurst Ave 06-028-24-11-0016
3. Parcels 2 and 4 are zoned C - 2, General Commercial, Parcels 1, 3, 5-7 are zoned R - 4, Multiple Family
Residence, all per City of Saint Louis Park zoning map dated 06/14/2013. Proposed zoning for Parcels 1-7 is
PUD - Planned Unit Development; setbacks are shown per architect site plan dated 02/27/2015.
4. CIC Number 1765, A Condominium Chateau, exists over Lots 3 and 4, Block 2, MANHATTAN PARK,
MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.
5. France Avenue street improvements lie within the surveyed property across Lots 10, 11 and 12, Block 2,
CALHOUN LAKE SIDE PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.
SURVEY NOTES
Parcel 1:
Lot 1, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 2:
The South 27 feet of Lot 10 and all of Lots 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15,
Also Lots 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, except the Westerly 100 feet thereof,
Also the South 27 feet of Lot 21, except the Westerly 100 feet thereof;
All in Block 2, Calhoun Lake Side Park, Minneapolis, Minn.;
And the North and South alley adjoining said Lots 16 through 20 and the South 27 feet of Lot 21, vacated by
Ordinance No. 591 adopted October 14, 1957, filed November 21, 1957, as Document No. 3093976 in Book 791
of Misc., Page 313.
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Abstract Property
Parcel 3:
Lots 2 and 3, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Torrens Property
Torrens Certificate No. 801865
Parcel 4:
The Westerly 100 feet of Lots 16 through 20 inclusive, and the Westerly 100 feet of the South 27 feet of Lot 21,
all in Block 2, Calhoun Lake Side Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 5:
Lot 4, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 6:
Lot 5, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Hennepin County, Minnesota
Abstract Property
Parcel 7:
Lots 6 and 7, Block 2, Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn., Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Abstract Property
Parcel 8:
That part of the alley, as dedicated in the recorded plat of "Manhattan Park, Minneapolis, Minn.", lying westerly
of the northerly extension of the east line of Lot 1, Block 2, said plat, and lying easterly of the northerly
extension of the west line of Lot 7, Block 2, said plat.
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Developer:Bader Development
5402 Parkdale Drive
Suite 200
Saint Louis Park, MN 55416
952-540-8600
Architect:DJR Architecture
333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210
Union Plaza
Minneapolis, MN 55401
612-676-2700
Engineer/Surveyor: Sambatek
12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300
Minnetonka, MN 55343
763-476-6010
CONTACT INFORMATION
PROPERTY SUMMARY
Registration No.
I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was
prepared by me or under my direct supervision
and that I am a duly Licensed LAND SURVEYOR
under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
survey which is available upon request at Sambatek's,
Minnetonka, MN office.
Date:21729
Rick M. Blom
02/24/2015
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo. By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved: Book / Page:
Phase: Initial Issued:
Client
BADER
DEVELOPMENT
THE
SHOREHAM
ST. LOUIS PARK,
MINNESOTA
MGB JTA/JMW
EWM
03/02/2015
DJR20165PLAN REVIEW ONLY
03/02/2015 PRELIMINARY PUD
03/18/2015 PRELIMINARY COMMENTS
04/17/2015 REVISED CITY SUBMITTAL
04/29/2015
PUD APPLICATION COMMENTS
05/12/2015 CITY COMMENTS
May 12, 2015 - 2:32pm - User:498 L:\PROJECTS\DJR20165\dwg\Survey\20165-PPLAT.dwg
C2.01
PRELIMINARY
PLAT
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 21
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo. By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved: Book / Page:
Phase: Initial Issued:
Client
BADER
DEVELOPMENT
THE
SHOREHAM
ST. LOUIS PARK,
MINNESOTA
MGB JTA/JMW
EWM
03/02/2015
DJR20165PLAN REVIEW ONLY
Registration No.
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or
report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly licensed
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,
Minnetonka, MN office.
Date:41326
Erik W. Miller
03/02/2015
03/02/2015 PRELIMINARY PUD
03/18/2015 PRELIMINARY COMMENTS
04/17/2015 REVISED CITY SUBMITTAL
04/29/2015
PUD APPLICATION COMMENTS
05/12/2015 CITY COMMENTS
May 12, 2015 - 2:33pm - User:498 L:\PROJECTS\DJR20165\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\20165-C3-SITE.dwg
C3.01
SITE PLAN
AREA
TOTAL SITE AREA
SETBACKS
FRONT YARD
REAR YARD
SIDE YARD
ZONING
EXISTING ZONING
PROPOSED ZONING
EXISTING
IMPERVIOUS AREA
PERVIOUS AREA
TOTAL
PROPOSED
IMPERVIOUS AREA
PERVIOUS AREA
TOTAL
A. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST TENTH FOOT.
B. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
BACK OF CURB IS SHOWN GRAPHICALLY ONLY.
C. ALL AREAS ARE ROUNDED TO THE NEAREST SQUARE FOOT.
D. ALL PARKING STALLS TO BE 9' IN WIDTH AND 18' IN LENGTH UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
E. CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACT BUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE
LOCATIONS.
F. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR PYLON SIGN DETAILS
G. SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR LIGHT POLE FOUNDATION DETAIL AND FOR EXACT LOCATIONS OF LIGHT
POLE.
H. REFER TO PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, LOT NUMBERS, LOT AREAS, AND LOT DIMENSIONS.
I. ALL GRADIENTS ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPE
OF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48). THE
MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL OR ACCESS ISLE SHALL BE 2.08% (1:48).
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA ROUTES
PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER
IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THE DESIGN
GRADIENT.
J. "NO PARKING" SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED ALONG ALL DRIVEWAYS AS REQUIRED BY CITY.
K. STREET NAMES ARE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY.
L. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED. DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENTS WILL BE PROVIDED OVER ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES AND UP TO THE HIGH WATER LEVEL OF ALL
PONDS.
LEGEND
EASEMENT
CURB & GUTTER
BUILDING
RETAINING WALL
SAWCUT LINE
NUMBER OF PARKING
STALLS PER ROW
SIGN
PIPE BOLLARD
STANDARD DUTY
ASPHALT PAVING
HEAVY DUTY
ASPHALT PAVING
CONCRETE PAVING
PROPERTY LIMIT
EXISTINGPROPOSED
KEY NOTE
DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY
DEVELOPMENT NOTES
KEY NOTES
WETLAND LIMITS
TREELINE
A. BUILDING, STOOPS, STAIRS (REF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS)
B. B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
C. B-618 6CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER
D. ZERO CURB SECTION
E. CONCRETE APRON
F. FLAT CURB SECTION
G. SEGMENTAL BLOCK RETAINING WALL
H. ACCESSIBLE RAMP
I. BIKE RACKS (REF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS)
J. PLANTER (REF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS)
K. PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK - ZEBRA DESIGN
L. "ONE-WAY DO NOT ENTER" SIGN
M. LIGHT STANDARD (REF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS)
N. BRICK PIERS (REF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS)
O. FENCE (REF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS)
P. MONUMENT SIGN (REF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR DETAILS)
Q. 8' WIDE MULTI-PURPOSE TRAIL
2.23 AC
20 FEET
30 FEET
20 FEET
C-2 & R-4
PUD
63% 1.59 AC
37% 0.95 AC
2.23 AC
77% 1.73 AC
23% 0.50 AC
2.23 AC
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 22
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo. By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved: Book / Page:
Phase: Initial Issued:
Client
BADER
DEVELOPMENT
THE
SHOREHAM
ST. LOUIS PARK,
MINNESOTA
MGB JTA/JMW
EWM
03/02/2015
DJR20165PLAN REVIEW ONLY
Registration No.
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or
report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly licensed
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,
Minnetonka, MN office.
Date:41326
Erik W. Miller
03/02/2015
03/02/2015 PRELIMINARY PUD
03/18/2015 PRELIMINARY COMMENTS
04/17/2015 REVISED CITY SUBMITTAL
04/29/2015
PUD APPLICATION COMMENTS
05/12/2015 CITY COMMENTS
May 12, 2015 - 2:33pm - User:498 L:\PROJECTS\DJR20165\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\C2.02 CONST. VEHICLE PARKING.dwg
C2.02
CONSTRUCTION
ROUTE/PARKING
CONSTRUCTION ROUTE/PARKING - PHASE 2CONSTRUCTION ROUTE/PARKING - PHASE 1
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 23
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo. By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved: Book / Page:
Phase: Initial Issued:
Client
BADER
DEVELOPMENT
THE
SHOREHAM
ST. LOUIS PARK,
MINNESOTA
MGB JTA/JMW
EWM
03/02/2015
DJR20165PLAN REVIEW ONLY
Registration No.
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or
report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly licensed
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,
Minnetonka, MN office.
Date:41326
Erik W. Miller
03/02/2015
03/02/2015 PRELIMINARY PUD
03/18/2015 PRELIMINARY COMMENTS
04/17/2015 REVISED CITY SUBMITTAL
04/29/2015
PUD APPLICATION COMMENTS
05/12/2015 CITY COMMENTS
May 12, 2015 - 3:11pm - User:593 L:\PROJECTS\DJR20165\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\20165-C4-GRADE.dwg
C4.01
GRADING &
EROSION
CONTROL
BUILDING
RETAINING WALL
PROPERTY LIMIT
EXISTINGPROPOSED
WETLAND LIMITS
TREELINE
STORM SEWER
902
SOIL BORINGS 1042.56
ST 5
GRADING NOTES
DRAINTILE
D
A. PROPOSED CONTOURS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION. SPOT ELEVATIONS ALONG PROPOSED CURB DENOTE GUTTER GRADE.
B.CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT “GUTTER OUT” WHERE WATER DRAINS AWAY FROM CURB. ALL
OTHER AREAS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AS “GUTTER IN” CURB.
C. ALL GRADIENT ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPE OF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB
RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48). THE MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADA PARKING STALL
OR ACCESS AISLE SHALL BE IN 2.08% (1:48). THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA
ROUTES PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A
DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD VERSUS THE DESIGN GRADIENT.
D. THE CONTRACTOR IS CAUTIONED THAT “THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THESE PLANS IS A UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL
____________. THIS QUALITY LEVEL WAS DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-02 TITLED “STANDARD
GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA”. THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR
SUBCONTRACTORS SHALL DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE COMMENCING WORK, BY CONTACTING
THE NOTIFICATION CENTER (GOPHER STATE ONE FOR MINNESOTA AT 1-800-252-1166). THE CONTRACTOR AND/OR SUBCONTRACTOR
AGREES TO BE FULLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT BE OCCASIONED BY HIS OR HER FAILURE TO EXACTLY
LOCATE AND PRESERVE ANY AND ALL UTILITIES (UNDERGROUND AND OVERHEAD).
IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO RELOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES WHICH CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED
IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
E. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THE
ADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.
F. SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, THE CONTRACTOR WILL
BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONS AND PROPERTY
DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL APPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING
HOURS. THE DUTY OF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF THE CONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE
IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THE
CONSTRUCTION SITE.
G. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OWNER'S
SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE
FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.
A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY:
COMPANY:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
DATED:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SOILS REPORT.
H. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE DEWATERING AS REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION.
I. PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET AND PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT
THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS
ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICH SECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE
SOILS SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER.
J. REPLACE ALL SUBGRADE SOIL DISTURBED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE BECOME UNSUITABLE AND WILL NOT PASS A TEST
ROLL. REMOVE UNSUITABLE SOIL FROM THE SITE AND IMPORT SUITABLE SOIL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.
K. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC CONTROL
DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF
TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS.
L. THE TREES AND OTHER NATURAL VEGETATION WITHIN THE PROJECT AND/OR ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT ARE OF PRIME CONCERN TO
THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS AND SHALL BE A RESTRICTED AREA. HE WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROTECT THE TREES WHICH ARE TO BE
SAVED TO BE SURE THAT THE EQUIPMENT IS NOT NEEDLESSLY OPERATED UNDER NEARBY TREES AND SHALL EXERCISE EXTREME
CAUTION IN WORKING ADJACENT TO TREES. SHOULD ANY PORTION OF THE TREE BRANCHES REQUIRE REMOVAL TO PERMIT
OPERATION OF THE CONTRACTOR'S EQUIPMENT, HE SHALL OBTAIN THE SERVICES OF A PROFESSIONAL TREE TRIMMING SERVICE TO
TRIM THE TREES PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF OPERATION. SHOULD THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS RESULT IN THE BREAKING OF
ANY LIMBS, THE BROKEN LIMBS SHOULD BE REMOVED IMMEDIATELY AND CUTS SHALL BE PROPERLY PROTECTED TO MINIMIZE ANY
LASTING DAMAGE TO THE TREE. NO TREES SHALL BE REMOVED WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION BY THE ENGINEER. COSTS FOR TRIMMING
SERVICES SHALL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL TO THE CONSTRUCTION AND NO SPECIAL PAYMENT WILL BE MADE.
RESTRICTED AREAS SHALL INCLUDE ALL DESIGNATED TREED AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE DESIGNATED CONSTRUCTION ZONE. ALL
VEGETATION WITHIN THE RESTRICTED AREAS SHALL REMAIN.
CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTRICT ALL GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TO AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE PLANS. ACTIVITIES
WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION MAY BE RESTRICTED TO A NARROWER WIDTH IN THE FIELD TO SAVE ADDITIONAL TREES AS DIRECTED BY
THE OWNER.
ACTIVITIES PROHIBITED OUTSIDE OF THE CONSTRUCTION BOUNDARIES WOULD INCLUDE, BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO: SOIL AND OTHER
MATERIAL STOCKPILING, EQUIPMENT OR MACHINERY STORAGE, DRIVING OF ANY VEHICLE, LEAKAGE OR SPILLAGE OF ANY “WASHOUT”
OR OTHER TOXIC MATERIAL. THE COLLECTION OF OTHER DEBRIS AND SOIL STOCKPILING WILL BE IN AN AREA DETERMINED ON-SITE BY
THE ENGINEER.
ALL RESTRICTED AREAS SHALL BE FENCED OFF WITH BRIGHT ORANGE POLYETHYLENE SAFETY NETTING AND STEEL STAKES AS SHOWN
ON THE TREE PROTECTION DETAIL. AT NO TIME SHALL THIS FENCING BE REMOVED OR ACTIVITY OF ANY KIND TAKE PLACE WITHIN IT.
FINAL PLACEMENT OF ALL PROTECTIVE FENCING SHALL BE COMPLETE BEFORE ANY WORK COMMENCES ON-SITE.
BEFORE COMMENCING WITH ANY EXCAVATION THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE ALL PREPARATORY WORK REGARDING TREE
REMOVAL, ROOT PRUNING, TREE PRUNING AND STUMP REMOVAL TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER.
PREPARATORY WORK SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING AND SHALL BE COMPLETED UNDER THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF THE OWNER'S
REPRESENTATIVE:
1. TREE REMOVAL: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FELL THE TREES. AT NO TIME SHALL TREES BE BULLDOZED OUT, BUT SHALL
BE CUT DOWN AND STUMPS REMOVED SEPARATELY. PRIOR TO THE FELLING OF ALL TREES, PROPER REMOVAL OF A
PORTION OR ALL OF THE CANOPY SHALL BE COMPLETED SO THAT TREES IN THE RESTRICTED AREAS SHALL NOT BE
INJURED IN THE PROCESS.
2. ROOT PRUNING: BEFORE ANY STUMPS ARE TO BE REMOVED, ALL ROOTS SHALL BE SEVERED FROM ROOTS IN THE
RESTRICTED AREAS BY SAW CUTTING WITH A VERMEER DESIGNED FOR ROOT PRUNING, BY HAND, OR WITH A
CHAINSAW. TREE ROOTS PROJECTING INTO THE CONSTRUCTION ZONE SHALL BE EXPOSED PRIOR TO ROOT PRUNING
WITH SMALL MACHINERY, I.E..., BOBCAT.
3. STUMP REMOVAL: AT SUCH TIME THAT ROOTS HAVE BEEN PROPERLY SEVERED, STUMPS MAY BE REMOVED. WHERE
REMOVAL OF CERTAIN STUMPS COULD CAUSE DAMAGE TO EXISTING PROTECTED TREES, TREE STUMPS SHALL BE
GROUND OUT. ALL STUMP REMOVAL SHALL BE UNDER THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.
4. TREE PRUNING: PROPER PRUNING OF TREES IN THE RESTRICTED ZONE SHALL BE DIRECTED BY AND SUPERVISION AT
ALL TIMES BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.
AN OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE WILL BE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES DURING THE PREPARATORY AND CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.
MULCH RATHER THAN SEED OR SOD WILL BE USED AT THE BASE OF QUALITY TREES TO A PERIMETER DETERMINED BY THE
OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. AREAS TO BE SEEDED FOR EROSION CONTROL PURPOSES WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION ZONE ARE TO
BE DETERMINED BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. NATURAL GROUND COVER WILL BE MAINTAINED WHEREVER POSSIBLE.
5. THE USE OF RETAINING WALLS NEAR TREES, IN ADDITION TO THOSE REQUIRED ON THE PLANS SHALL BE DETERMINED IN THE
FIELD, BASED ON TREE LOCATIONS AND TOPOGRAPHY.
M.IF THE CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS ANY DRAIN TILE WITHIN THE SITE, HE OR SHE SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER WITH THE LOCATION,
SIZE, INVERT AND IF THE TILE LINE IS ACTIVE. NO ACTIVE DRAIN TILE SHALL BE BACKFILLED WITHOUT REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND
APPROVAL FROM THE PROJECT ENGINEER.
N. RETAINING WALL(S) SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF _________________ (MODULAR BLOCK, TREATED TIMBER, BOULDER, ETC.) MATERIAL.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT TO THE ENGINEER AND LOCAL AUTHORITY CERTIFIED ENGINEERING DRAWINGS, DESIGN
CALCULATIONS AND SOIL BORINGS. THE CERTIFIED ENGINEER FOR THE RETAINING WALL(S) SHALL PROVIDE CONSTRUCTION
OBSERVATIONS OF THE RETAINING WALL IMPROVEMENT, AND A LETTER CERTIFYING THE INSTALLATION OF THE WALL(S) WAS
CONSTRUCTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS.
962.5
X962.5X902
SPOT ELEVATION
CONTOUR
RIP RAP
OVERFLOW ELEV.
CURB & GUTTER
LEGENDEROSION CONTROL MATERIALS
QUANTITIES
ITEM UNIT QUANTITY
SILT FENCE LINEAR FEET 1400
SILT DIKE LINEAR FEET 0
BIO-ROLL LINEAR FEET 0
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE UNIT 1
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-1)UNIT 7
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE (IP-2)UNIT 0
INLET PROTECTION DEVICE 1
TEMPORARY STONE
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE
SILT FENCE
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 24
SCALE IN FEET
0 6030
Project
Location
Certification
Sheet Title
Summary
Revision History
Sheet No.Revision
Project No.
Date Submittal / RevisionNo. By
Designed:Drawn:
Approved: Book / Page:
Phase: Initial Issued:
Client
BADER
DEVELOPMENT
THE
SHOREHAM
ST. LOUIS PARK,
MINNESOTA
MGB JTA/JMW
EWM
03/02/2015
DJR20165PLAN REVIEW ONLY
Registration No.
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or
report was prepared by me or under my direct
supervision and that I am a duly licensed
professional ENGINEER under the laws of the state
of Minnesota.
If applicable, contact us for a wet signed copy of this
plan which is available upon request at Sambatek's,
Minnetonka, MN office.
Date:41326
Erik W. Miller
03/02/2015
03/02/2015 PRELIMINARY PUD
03/18/2015 PRELIMINARY COMMENTS
04/17/2015 REVISED CITY SUBMITTAL
04/29/2015
PUD APPLICATION COMMENTS
05/12/2015 CITY COMMENTS
TELEPHONE
ELECTRIC
GAS LINE
FORCEMAIN (SAN.)
EASEMENT
WATERMAIN
SANITARY SEWER
EXISTINGPROPOSED
STORM SEWER
CURB & GUTTER
DRAINTILE
D
S S
SLS
LEGEND
May 12, 2015 - 2:33pm - User:498 L:\PROJECTS\DJR20165\dwg\Civil\Preliminary\20165-C6-UTIL.dwg
C6.01
UTILITY PLAN
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 25
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 26
13,822 SF
14%
ZONE A
ZONE B
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 27
UPUPA201C5A200D318CAR WASH19242424212021VANC1A310C3A310TTTTTTTTT34TRASH/RECYCLINGELEVATOREQUIPMENTELEVATOREQUIPMENTSTAIRSTAIRSTAIRMECHANICALWATERSERVICEPARKINGRAMP240'303'222'26'248'GARAGE DOOR1AS11280 SFSETBACK20'SETBACK10'SETBACK28'SETBACK3' - 0"S ETBACK26'2AS114AS11ARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321A100LEVEL P1 FLOOR PLAN3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15AuthorCheckerTHE SHOREHAMDesigner 1/16" = 1'-0"A1LEVEL P1 OVERALL1 PDR03/02/152 PUD UPDATE03/18/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 28
UPUPUPUPUPA201C5A200D1A200D3C2C3C1C3142252120MEDICAL OFFICE10,000 SFRESIDENTIAL AMENITY5,200 SFOFFICE10,000 SFRESIDENTIALPATIOCOMMERCIAL PARKING41 STALLSCOMMERCIAL PARKING41 STALLSCOMMERCIAL PARKING6 STALLSBIKE PARKINGRETAINING WALLRETAINING WALLC1A310C3A310GUARDRAIL ONTOP OF WALLRAMPSETB ACK
20'151'91'64'306'DOG EXCERCISE AREARAMP UP1AS11COMMERCIALTRASH / RECYCLING475 SF2AS114AS11ARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321A110LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15LMSBTHE SHOREHAMDesigner 1/16" = 1'-0"A1FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 11 PDR03/02/152 PUD UPDATE03/18/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 29
UPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPUPA201C5A200D5A200D3C2C3C1C32+BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BRAMENITY1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR1BR2BR2+BR2+BR2BR2BR2BR2BR2BR2BR2BR2BR2BR2BR1+BR1+BR1+BR1+BRSTSTC1A310C3A310TRASH/RECYCLING222'SETBACK20'SETBACK30'SETBACK
23'147'95'63'SE TBACK
25'SETBACK20'226'SETBACK27'SETBACK25'15' - 4"8' - 4"A201A2021AS112AS11ARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321A120LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15LMSBTHE SHOREHAMDesigner 1/16" = 1'-0"A1LEVEL 2 OVERALL1 PDR03/02/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 30
A201C5A200D1A200D3C2C3C1C3C1A310C3A310ELEVATOR OVERRUNELEVATOR OVERRUNMECHANICAL EQUIPMENTROOF ACCESS STAIR214'140'A201A202ARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321A160ROOF PLAN3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15LMSBTHE SHOREHAMDesigner 1/16" = 1'-0"A1ROOF PLAN1 PDR03/02/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 31
LEVEL 2120' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"31' - 11 5/8"STUCCOBRICKLAP SIDING - FIBER CEMENTSTUCCOBRICKBRICKSTUCCOBRICKLEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2120' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"ROOF162' - 7 1/2"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"MEZZANINE110' - 0"MEDICAL OFFICESIGNAGEBRICKSTUCCO #1BRICKBRICK889.37'B.O.W10' - 0"8' - 0"2' - 0"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"20' - 0"65' - 3 1/2"34' - 10 15/32"BRICKSTUCCOPRECAST CORNICEBRICKPREFINISHED ALUMINUM BALCONYPRECAST CORNICEFABRIC AWNINGSTANDING SEAM METAL ROOFPREFINISHED ALUMINUM BALCONYPRECAST CORNICEPRECAST CORNICECOLORED ROCK FACE BLOCKMETAL GRILL AT OPEN GARAGEMETAL PANEL AT ELEVATOR OVERRUNMEDICAL OFFICE SIGNAGESTUCCO #1ALUMINUM STOREFRONTT.O. PARAPET165' - 0"LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2120' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"ROOF162' - 7 1/2"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"MEZZANINE110' - 0"20' - 0"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"2' - 8"65' - 3 1/2"BRICK #1BRICK #2STUCCO #1STUCCO #1STUCCO #1STUCCO #1BRICK #1STUCCO #1FIBER CEMENT PANELBRICK #1BRICK #2MEDICAL OFFICESIGNAGEBRICK #1PREFINISHED ALUMINUM BALCONYMETAL CORNICEENTRY CANOPY WITHSTANDING SEAM METAL ROOFBRICK PIERFIBER CEMENT PANELT.O. PARAPET165' - 0"ABCDEHGFBUILDING MATERIALS BY ELEVATIONDRAWING NO. CLASS 1CLASS 2GENERAL NOTESA - 2/A200B - 3/A200C - 1/A201D - 1/A200E - 1/A202F - 2/A202G - 2/A201H - 3/A20177%85%77%75%64%61%72%73%23%15%23%25%36%39%28%27%CLASS 1 MATERIALS:BRICK, GLASS, STUCCOCLASS 2 MATERIALS:FIBER CEMENT PANEL,TEXTURED CONCRETE BLOCKMETAL PANEL,METAL FLASHINGTOTAL 75% 25%ARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321A200ELEVATIONS3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15APSBTHE SHOREHAMDesigner 3/32" = 1'-0"D5SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION - D 3/32" = 1'-0"D3WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION - A 3/32" = 1'-0"D1NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION - B 1" = 80'-0"ELEVATION LEGEND1 PDR03/02/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 32
LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2120' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"ROOF162' - 7 1/2"LEVEL P189' - 4"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"20' - 0"10' - 8"MEZZANINE110' - 0"STUCCO #2STUCCO #1FIBER CEMENT PANELBRICK #1FIBER CEMENT PANELBRICK #1STUCCO #1FIBER CEMENTFIBER CEMENT PANELPREFINISHEDALUMINUM BALCONYPRECAST CORNICEBRICK #1PREFINISHEDALUMINUM BALCONYSPLIT FACE BLOCKMETAL GRILL AT OPEN GARAGET.O. PARAPET165' - 0"LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2120' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"ROOF162' - 7 1/2"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"MEZZANINE110' - 0"2' - 8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"18' - 0"STUCCO #2STUCCO #1STUCCO #1FIBER CEMENT PANELSTUCCO #1PREFINISHEDALUMINUM BALCONYBRICK #1PRECAST CORNICEBRICK #1FABRIC AWNINGMEDICAL OFFICE SIGNAGEMEDICAL OFFICEENTRANCE WITH STANDINGSEAM METAL ROOFFIBER CEMENT PANELPRECAST CORNICET.O. PARAPET165' - 0"LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2120' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"ROOF162' - 7 1/2"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"20' - 0"62' - 7 1/2"STUCCO #1BRICK #1BRICK #1STUCCO #1PRECAST CORNICEFIBER CEMENT PANEL ON ROOFSTAIR ACCESS AND ELEVATOROVERRUNSPLIT FACE BLOCKT.O. PARAPET165' - 0"ABCDEHGFBUILDING MATERIALS BY ELEVATIONDRAWING NO. CLASS 1CLASS 2GENERAL NOTESA - 2/A200B - 3/A200C - 1/A201D - 1/A200E - 1/A202F - 2/A202G - 2/A201H - 3/A20177%85%77%75%64%61%72%73%23%15%23%25%36%39%28%27%CLASS 1 MATERIALS:BRICK, GLASS, STUCCOCLASS 2 MATERIALS:FIBER CEMENT PANEL,TEXTURED CONCRETE BLOCKMETAL PANEL,METAL FLASHINGTOTAL 75% 25%ARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321A201ELEVATIONS3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15LMSBTHE SHOREHAMDesigner 3/32" = 1'-0"C5EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION - C 3/32" = 1'-0"C3COURTYARD SOUTH - G 3/32" = 1'-0"C1COURTYARD WEST - H 1" = 80'-0"ELEVATION LEGEND1 PDR03/02/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 33
LEVEL 2120' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"FIBER CEMENT LAPSTUCCO #1STUCCO #2STUCCO #2STUCCO #2STUCCO #1BRICKPRECAST CORNICEPRECAST CORNICE18' - 0"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"2' - 8"52' - 8 15/32"ROCK FACED BLOCKMETAL BALCONYCIP CONCRETERETAINING WALLMETAL GUARD RAILMETAL BALCONYMETAL GUARD RAILCOMMERCIAL PARKING ENTRYMETAL GRILL AT OPEN GARAGET.O. PARAPET165' - 0"LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2120' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"ROOF162' - 7 1/2"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"STANDING SEAM METAL ROOFCOMMERCIAL SIGNAGEPRECAST CORNICEBRICKBRICKMETAL BALCONYFIBER CEMENT PANEL2' - 8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"10' - 7 7/8"20' - 0"65' - 3 1/2"FABRIC AWNINGMETAL BALCONYT.O. PARAPET165' - 0"ABCDEHGFLEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL P189' - 4"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"MEZZANINE110' - 0"SIDEWALK BEYOND - SEE CIVIL FOR GRADECAST IN PLACE CONCRETERETAINING WALL42" HIGHGUARDRAILLEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL P189' - 4"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"MEZZANINE110' - 0"A1A202LIGHT FIXTURE42" HIGHGUARDRAILCAST IN PLACECONCRETE RETAINGINWALLGARAGE ENTRYGRADE LEVELPARKING17' - 8"3' - 6"LBUILDING MATERIALS BY ELEVATIONDRAWING NO. CLASS 1CLASS 2GENERAL NOTESA - 2/A200B - 3/A200C - 1/A201D - 1/A200E - 1/A202F - 2/A202G - 2/A201H - 3/A20177%85%77%75%64%61%72%73%23%15%23%25%36%39%28%27%CLASS 1 MATERIALS:BRICK, GLASS, STUCCOCLASS 2 MATERIALS:FIBER CEMENT PANEL,TEXTURED CONCRETE BLOCKMETAL PANEL,METAL FLASHINGTOTAL 75% 25%20' - 0"SIDEWALK6' - 0"BLVD6' - 0"PARKING8' - 6"DRIVE AISLE11' - 0"DRIVE AISLE11' - 0"PARKING8' - 0"BUILDINGEDGECLSAINT LOUIS PARKMINNEAPOLISEXISTINGBUILDINGARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321A202ELEVATIONS3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15LMSBTHE SHOREHAMDesigner 3/32" = 1'-0"C3COURTYARD NORTH - E 3/32" = 1'-0"C2COURTYARD EAST - F 1" = 80'-0"ELEVATION LEGEND 1/8" = 1'-0"A1PARKING RAMP SECTION 1/8" = 1'-0"E1PARKING RAMP CROSS SECTION 1/8" = 1'-0"D2FRANCE AVENUE STREET SECTION1 PDR03/02/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 34
LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2120' - 0"T.O. Footing86' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"ROOF162' - 7 1/2"LEVEL P189' - 4"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"MEZZANINE110' - 0"C3A3106' - 0"VIEW CORRIDORLINEROOFTOP MECHANICALUNITS6' - 0"VIEW CORRIDORLINEROOFTOP MECHANICALUNITT.O. PARAPET165' - 0"1234578910111213141516LEVEL 1100' - 0"LEVEL 2120' - 0"T.O. Footing86' - 0"LEVEL 3130' - 7 7/8"LEVEL 4141' - 3 3/4"LEVEL 5151' - 11 5/8"ROOF162' - 7 1/2"LEVEL P189' - 4"LEVEL 1B102' - 0"MEZZANINE110' - 0"C1A3106' - 0"VIEW CORRIDORLINE6' - 0"VIEW CORRIDORLINEROOFTOP MECHANICALUNITST.O. PARAPET165' - 0"ABCDEFGHIJKLARCHITECTURE, INCCopyright 2008 DJR Architecture, IncB8333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401612.676.2700 www.djr-inc.comPRINT NAMESIGNATUREREGISTRATION NUMBER DATECLIENTBader Development5402 Parkdale Drive, #200Minneapolis, MN 5541Issue:Date:Project #:Date:Drawn by:Checked by:CONTRACTORTBDSTRUCTURALTBDCIVILSambatek12800 Whitewater Drive Suite 300Minnetonka, MN 55343Phone: (763) 476-6010I hereby certify that this plan, specification,or report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect under the laws of theState of Minnesota.PRELIMINARY; NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACDEFGH7654321A310BUILDING SECTIONS3915 HWY 7, SAINT LOUIS PARK, MNApprover04/29/1513-09804/29/15LMSBTHE SHOREHAMDesigner 1/16" = 1'-0"C1NORTH - SOUTH SITE SECTION LOOKINGEAST 1/16" = 1'-0"C3EAST - WEST SITE SECTION LOOKINGNORTH1 PDR03/02/153 PUD FINAL COMMENT04/17/15City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 35
SCOPE AND FEE BUDGET
December 1, 2014
ASAP Building (Hoffan Callan Company)
3000 France Ave S, St Louis Park, MN
Description Estimated Fee
Documentation of Building History
Historical documentation will include:
An architectural description of the building
A historical narrative
Delivery of archival materials to selected repositories
The architectural description and historical narrative are expected to
be in the range of 7‐10 pages total.
50 hours
$5,500
35mm Documentary Photography
Photographic services will be provided by Daniel Pratt, as a subconsultant
to PVN. Deliverables will include:
Photographic images of the Star Tribune building, sufficient to
meet the photographic documentation standards of the Minnesota
Historic Property Record (MHPR) ‐ Level II.
One (1) set of 35mm negatives on Ilford 125 film processed to
MHPR archival quality, enclosed in a labeled, acid‐free sleeve.
One (1) set of properly labeled, enlarged 5" x 7" prints exposed on
archivally‐processed, double‐weight, fiber‐based photographic
paper.
One (1) sets of labeled archival mount cards (slotted for 5" x 7"
prints).
One (1) Tagged Image Format (TIF) file of each 35mm image,
scanned at 2400 dpi resolution from the 35mm negatives.
One (1) Index to Photographs with descriptions of documentary
field images.
$3,000
(Additional
archival quality
negatives and
prints can be
produced at
$700 per set)
Reimbursable Allowance (Copies, etc.) $250
Total $8,750
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 36
Memorandum
SRF No. 0148718
To: Ryan P. Kelley, CNU-A, Associate Planner
City of St. Louis Park
From: Matt Pacyna, PE, Senior Associate
Jordan Schwarze, PE, Senior Engineer
Date: May 1, 2015
Subject: Highway 7 & Glenhurst Mixed-Use Traffic Study
Introduction
SRF has completed a traffic study for the proposed Highway 7 & Glenhurst Mixed-Use development
located near the CSAH 25/France Avenue intersection in the City of St. Louis Park (see Figure 1:
Project Location). The main objectives of this study are to review existing operations within the study
area, evaluate the traffic impacts to the adjacent roadway network, and recommend any necessary
improvements to accommodate the proposed development. This study will also provide a trip
generation comparison between the existing and proposed land uses. The following sections provide
the assumptions, analysis, and study conclusions/recommendations offered for consideration.
Existing Conditions
The existing conditions were reviewed to establish a baseline in order to identify any future impacts
associated with the proposed development. The evaluation of existing conditions includes peak period
intersection turning movement counts, field observations, and an intersection capacity analysis.
Data Collection
Peak period turning movement and pedestrian counts were collected by SRF during the week of
December 15, 2014 at the following study intersections:
• CSAH 25 and France Avenue
• France Avenue and CSAH 25 Frontage Road
• Glenhurst Avenue and CSAH 25 Frontage Road
Historical annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes within the study area were provided by the
Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT).
ONE CARLSON PARKWAY, SUITE 150 | MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55447 | 763.475.0010 | WWW.SRFCONSULTING.COM
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 37
0148718
May 2015
Project Location
Highway 7 & Glenhurst Mixed-Use Traffic Study
St. Louis Park, MN
Figure 1France AveFronta
g
e
R
d
CSAH 25 NORTHNorthProject
Location
Glenhurst AveMinnetonka Blvd
31st St
CSAH
2
5 30-1/2 St Drew AveInglewood AveH:\Projects\8718\TS\Figures\Fig01_Project Location.cdrCity Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 38
Ryan P. Kelley, CNU-A May 1, 2015
City of St. Louis Park Page 3
In addition to the intersection turning movement counts, observations were completed to identify
roadway characteristics within the study area (i.e. roadway geometry, posted speed limits, and traffic
controls). Currently, CSAH 25 is a four-lane divided roadway with a posted speed limit of
35 miles per hour (mph) while France Avenue is a two-lane roadway with a posted speed limit of
30 mph. Glenhurst Avenue and the CSAH 25 Frontage Road are two-lane roadways with no posted
speed limit. The CSAH 25/France Avenue intersection is signalized, the France Avenue/
CSAH 25 Frontage Road intersection is side-street stop controlled, and the Glenhurst Avenue/
CSAH 25 Frontage Road intersection is uncontrolled.
It should be noted that CSAH 25 is functionally classified as a minor arterial while France Avenue is
functionally classified as a collector. Other study roadways are functionally classified as local streets.
Existing geometrics, traffic controls, and volumes within the study area are shown in Figure 2.
Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis
An existing intersection capacity analysis was completed using Synchro/SimTraffic software (V8.0) to
establish a baseline condition to which future traffic operations could be compared. Capacity analysis
results identify a Level of Service (LOS) which indicates how well an intersection is operating.
Intersections are ranked from LOS A through LOS F. The LOS results are based on average delay
per vehicle, which correspond to the delay threshold values shown in Table 1. LOS A indicates the
best traffic operation, while LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity. Overall
intersection LOS A though LOS D is generally considered acceptable in the Twin Cities area.
Table 1. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections
LOS Designation Signalized Intersection
Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds)
Unsignalized Intersection
Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds)
A ≤ 10 ≤ 10
B > 10 - 20 > 10 - 15
C > 20 - 35 > 15 - 25
D > 35 - 55 > 25 - 35
E > 55 - 80 > 35 - 50
F > 80 > 50
For side-street stop/yield controlled intersections, special emphasis is given to providing an estimate
for the level of service of the side-street approach. Traffic operations at an unsignalized intersection
with side-street stop/yield control can be described in two ways. First, consideration is given to the
overall intersection level of service. This takes into account the total number of vehicles entering the
intersection and the capability of the intersection to support these volumes. Second, it is important to
consider the delay on the minor approach. Since the mainline does not have to stop, the majority of
delay is attributed to the side-street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic
volumes to experience high levels of delay (i.e. poor levels of service) on the side-street approaches,
but an acceptable overall intersection level of service during peak hour conditions.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 39
Existing Conditions
Highway 7 & Glenhurst Mixed-Use Traffic Study Figure 2NORTHNorthH:\Projects\8718\TS\Figures\Fig02_Existing Conditions.cdr0148718
May 2015
Project
Location France AveFronta
g
e
R
d
CSAH 25 Glenhurst AveMinnetonka Blvd
31st St
30-1/2 StNORTHNorth
- A.M. Peak Hour Volumes
- P.M. Peak Hour Volumes
- Pedestrian/Bicycle Peak Hour Volumes
- Estimated Year 2014 Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) Volumes
- Uncontrolled Intersection
- Side-Street Stop Controlled Intersection
- Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection
LEGEND
XX
(XX)
X,XXX 9,600 (36) 64(37) 38(27) 10France Ave263 (305)12 (43)53 (148) CSAH 25
(243) 156
(1,352) 825
(23) 10
128 (108)
1,481 (1,201)
11 (40)
CSAH 25
34,100
37,800
1,10
0
300St. Louis Park, MN
X (X)
1 (0)3 (0)0 (1)0 (1) (0) 0(12) 4(0) 0France Ave11 (27)3 (1)19 (78) Frontage Rd
(57) 28
(44) 3
(0) 0
80 (31)
14 (5)
0 (1)Driveway30 1/2 St
0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0) (2) 7(6) 9Glenhurst AveFrontage Rd
(95) 22
(5) 6
23 (24)
2 (8)0 (2)0 (0)2 (1)
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 40
Ryan P. Kelley, CNU-A May 1, 2015
City of St. Louis Park Page 5
Results of the existing intersection capacity analysis shown in Table 2 indicate that all study
intersections currently operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak
hours. However several queuing issues were observed, primarily at the CSAH 25/France Avenue
signalized intersection. Westbound queues along CSAH 25 were occasionally observed to extend
through the adjacent signalized intersection at Drew Avenue during the a.m. peak hour. Similarly,
eastbound queues along CSAH 25 were occasionally observed to extend through the adjacent
signalized intersection at Minnetonka Boulevard during the p.m. peak hour. Finally, northbound
France Avenue queues regularly extended to the CSAH 25 Frontage Road during both peak hours.
These northbound queues are a result of limited vehicular storage due to the closely spaced
CSAH 25 Frontage Road rather than an intersection capacity issue. No other significant delay or
queuing issues were observed in the field or traffic simulation at the study intersections. It should be
noted that queuing issues identified at the CSAH 25/France Avenue intersection are existing issues
and not related to the proposed development.
Table 2. Existing Intersection Capacity Analysis
Intersection A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
LOS Delay LOS Delay
CSAH 25 and France Avenue C 22 sec. C 31 sec.
France Avenue and CSAH 25 Frontage Road(1) A/A 5 sec. A/A 8 sec.
Glenhurst Avenue and CSAH 25 Frontage Road(2) A/A 1 sec. A/A 1 sec.
(1) Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control, where the overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach
LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay.
(2) Uncontrolled intersection treated as a side-street yield control intersection for the purpose of the capacity analysis.
Proposed Development
The proposed development is located south of the CSAH 25 Frontage Road between France Avenue
and Glenhurst Avenue in the City of St. Louis Park. The site is currently occupied by several land
uses, including two single-family residences, three residential townhomes, a digital printing business,
and a bookstore. All of these land uses are planned to be replaced by the proposed development
(shown in Figure 3), which consists of approximately 147 apartment units, 10,000 square feet of
general office space, and 10,000 square feet of medical office space. Construction of the proposed
development was assumed to be complete by the end of the year 2016.
Access to the proposed development is planned in three locations. One access is located along a
southern extension of France Avenue approximately 270 feet south of the CSAH 25 Frontage Road.
A second access is located along Glenhurst Avenue approximately 300 feet south of the CSAH 25
Frontage Road. These two locations will serve as the primary access for the majority of the proposed
development. A third access is located along the CSAH 25 Frontage Road and is designed as a
one-way pick-up/drop-off zone and short-term parking area. Further discussion regarding site access
is documented later in this study.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 41
Site Plan
Highway 7 & Glenhurst Mixed-Use Traffic Study Figure 3France AveFront
a
g
e
R
dNORTHNorth
Glenhurst Ave31st St
H:\Projects\8718\TS\Figures\Fig03_Site Plan.cdr0148718
May 2015NORTHNorthNORTHNorth St. Louis Park, MN
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 42
Ryan P. Kelley, CNU-A May 1, 2015
City of St. Louis Park Page 7
Year 2017 Conditions
To help determine impacts associated with the proposed development, traffic forecasts were
developed for year 2017 conditions (i.e. one year after anticipated completion). Year 2017 conditions
take into account general area background growth and traffic generated by the proposed development.
The evaluation of year 2017 conditions includes details on the traffic forecasts and an intersection
capacity analysis.
Year 2017 Traffic Forecasts
To account for general background growth in the area, an annual growth rate of one-half percent was
applied to the existing peak hour traffic volumes to develop year 2017 background traffic forecasts.
This growth rate is consistent with historical growth in the study area (based on MnDOT AADT
volumes).
To account for traffic impacts associated with the proposed development, trip generation estimates
for both the existing and proposed land uses were developed for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours and a
daily basis. These estimates, shown in Table 3, were developed using a combination of the
ITE Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition and peak period field observations. The existing trip
generation estimates were developed to provide a comparison between existing and proposed land
uses and to determine the approximate number of net new roadway system trips.
Table 3. Trip Generation Estimates
Land Use Type (ITE Code) Size A.M. Trips P.M. Trips Daily Trips In Out In Out
Existing Land Uses
Single-Family Housing (210) 2 Dwelling Units 0 1 1 1 19
Residential Townhouse (230) 3 Dwelling Units 0 1 1 1 17
Digital Printing Business(1) (N/A) N/A 3 2 2 8 75
Bookstore(1) (N/A) N/A 2 1 2 2 35
Total Existing Site Trips (5) (5) (6) (12) (146)
Proposed Land Uses
Apartment (220) 147 Dwelling Units 15 60 59 32 978
General Office Building (710) 10,000 Square Feet 14 2 3 12 110
Medical Office Building (720) 10,000 Square Feet 19 5 10 26 361
Subtotal 48 67 72 70 1,449
Modal Reduction (10%) (5) (7) (7) (7) (145)
Total Proposed Site Trips 43 60 65 63 1,304
Net New System Trips 38 55 59 51 1,158
(1) Trip generation estimates based on a.m. and p.m. peak period field observations.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 43
Ryan P. Kelley, CNU-A May 1, 2015
City of St. Louis Park Page 8
It should be noted that a 10 percent modal reduction, based on the methodology described in the
ITE Trip Generation Manual, Ninth Edition, was applied to account for available transit options in the
vicinity of the proposed development (i.e. Metro Transit Routes 17 and 25). Accounting for the modal
reduction, the proposed development is expected to generate approximately 103 a.m. peak hour,
128 p.m. peak hour and 1,304 daily trips. No other trip reductions were included.
To determine the approximate net change in overall site trip generation, trips from the existing land
uses were subtracted from the proposed development trips. Taking into account the existing land
uses, the proposed development is expected to generate approximately 93 a.m. peak hour, 110 p.m.
peak hour and 1,158 daily net new system trips. These trips were distributed throughout the area based
on the directional distribution shown in Figure 4, which was developed based on existing area travel
patterns and engineering judgment. The resultant year 2017 conditions, including general area
background growth and traffic generated by the proposed development, are shown in Figure 5.
Year 2017 Intersection Capacity Analysis
To determine how the adjacent roadway network will accommodate year 2017 traffic forecasts, an
intersection capacity analysis was completed using Synchro/SimTraffic software. Results of the
year 2017 intersection capacity analysis shown in Table 4 indicate that all study intersections are
expected to continue operating at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak
hours. The previously documented queuing issues at the CSAH 25/France Avenue intersection do
not significantly change due to the proposed development. No other significant delay or queuing
issues were observed in the traffic simulation at the study intersections.
Table 4. Year 2017 Intersection Capacity Analysis
Intersection A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour
LOS Delay LOS Delay
CSAH 25 and France Avenue C 26 sec. C 34 sec.
France Avenue and CSAH 25 Frontage Road(1) A/A 7 sec. A/A 9 sec.
Glenhurst Avenue and CSAH 25 Frontage Road(2) A/A 1 sec. A/A 1 sec.
(1) Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control, where the overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach
LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay.
(2) Uncontrolled intersection treated as a side-street yield control intersection for the purpose of the capacity analysis.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 44
Directional Distribution
Highway 7 & Glenhurst Mixed-Use Traffic Study Figure 4NORTHNorthH:\Projects\8718\TS\Figures\Fig04_Directional Distribution.cdr0148718
May 2015 France AveFronta
g
e
R
d
CSAH 25
Minnetonka Blvd
31st St
30-1/2 StNORTHNorthCSAH 25
30%25%45%Glenhurst AveSt. Louis Park, MN
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 45
Year 2017 Conditions
Highway 7 & Glenhurst Mixed-Use Traffic Study Figure 5NORTHNorthH:\Projects\8718\TS\Figures\Fig05_Year 2017 Conditions.cdr0148718
May 2015 France AveFronta
g
e
R
d
CSAH 25 Minnetonka Blvd
31st St
30-1/2 StNORTHNorth10,000CSAH 25
35,000
38,700
1,25
0
Glenhurst Ave500St. Louis Park, MN
- A.M. Peak Hour Volumes
- P.M. Peak Hour Volumes
- Pedestrian/Bicycle Peak Hour Volumes
- Estimated Year 2017 Average Daily
Traffic (ADT) Volumes
- Uncontrolled Intersection
- Side-Street Stop Controlled Intersection
- Traffic Signal Controlled Intersection
LEGEND
XX
(XX)
X,XXX France AveCSAH 25
X (X)France AveFrontage Rd
Driveway30 1/2 St
Glenhurst AveFrontage Rd (53) 82(50) 52(42) 27267 (310)22 (59)54 (150) (247) 158
(1,372) 837
(34) 18
130 (110)
1,503 (1,219)
22 (59) (2) 2(53) 49(0) 013 (30)30 (43)19 (79) (61) 31
(45) 3
(5) 3
81 (31)
14 (5)
0 (1) (7) 12(9) 12(102) 25
(13) 11
25 (26)
4 (11)
1 (0)3 (0)0 (1)0 (1)
0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)0 (2)0 (0)2 (1)
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 46
Ryan P. Kelley, CNU-A May 1, 2015
City of St. Louis Park Page 11
Site Plan/Access Review
A review of the proposed site plan was completed to identify any issues and recommend potential
improvements with regard to site access, traffic control, and circulation. Based on this review, the
following issues were identified that should be discussed further and/or incorporated:
1) Vehicular and truck maneuverability should be reviewed, particularly for the one-way
pick-up/drop-off zone along the CSAH 25 Frontage Road. Maneuverability should also be
reviewed at the driveway access to the underground parking area.
2) Internal traffic controls were not identified. However, traffic controls, signing, and striping
should be incorporated based on the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). In
particular, it is important to identify traffic controls at intersections between internal
roadways/driveways to minimize vehicular conflicts and driver confusion.
3) Due to the addition of development related traffic along Glenhurst Avenue, stop control
should be implemented on the northbound approach of the Glenhurst Avenue/
CSAH 25 Frontage Road intersection to reduce driver confusion.
An illustration of the potential site plan improvements is presented in Figure 6.
France Avenue Extension
Previous planning studies and the City’s Comprehensive Plan have identified the lack of north-south
connections in the City and how that impacts traffic circulation and bike/pedestrian connectivity. The
extension of France Avenue from the CSAH 25 Frontage Road to 31st Street may help address this
issue by providing a more direct connection for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. An extension
of France Avenue to 31st Street would likely result in a slight redistribution of local traffic patterns.
Residents along 31st Street would be more likely to utilize the extension of France Avenue rather than
Glenhurst Avenue and Ewing Ave to the west and east respectively. While proposed development
traffic would be expected to utilize France Avenue as far south as the proposed site access, an
additional 200 to 400 daily local vehicles would be expected to utilize France Avenue if it were
extended all the way to 31st Street. These vehicles are primarily expected to be those of existing local
residents utilizing the improved France Avenue connection to CSAH 25. It should be noted that at
extension of France Avenue to 31st Street would also provide improved bicyclist/pedestrian
connectivity with transit stops along CSAH 25 and the adjacent Frontage Road.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 47
Recommended Improvements
Highway 7 & Glenhurst Mixed-Use Traffic Study Figure 6H:\Projects\8718\TS\Figures\Fig06_Recommended Improvements.cdr0148718
May 2015
St. Louis Park, MN NORTHNorthFrance AveCSAH 25
Minnetonka Blvd
30-1/2 StNORTHNorthCSAH 25
Incorporate internal traffic controls,
signing, and striping based on the
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
Fronta
g
e
R
d
31st St Glenhurst AveReview vehicle and truck
turning maneuverability
within the proposed
development
Implement stop control on
the northbound approach of
the Glenhurst Avenue/
CSAH 25 Frontage Road
intersection.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 48
Ryan P. Kelley, CNU-A May 1, 2015
City of St. Louis Park Page 13
Future Considerations
Several potential future transportation related projects within the study area warrant consideration
with respect to this development. These projects include the reconstruction of CSAH 25 as an urban
roadway section, the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) Green Line Extension, and
redevelopment opportunities and their supporting roadway networks. These projects would likely
have an indirect impact to the proposed development. Further discussion regarding these projects
should occur to better understand potential impacts for the proposed development.
Summary and Conclusions
The following study conclusions and recommendations are offered for your consideration:
• Results of the existing intersection capacity analysis indicate that all study intersections
currently operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours.
However several queuing issues were observed, primarily at the CSAH 25/France Avenue
signalized intersection:
o Westbound queues along CSAH 25 were occasionally observed to extend through the
adjacent signalized intersection at Drew Avenue during the a.m. peak hour.
o Eastbound queues along CSAH 25 were occasionally observed to extend through the
adjacent signalized intersection at Minnetonka Boulevard during the p.m. peak hour.
o Northbound France Avenue queues regularly extended to the CSAH 25 Frontage Road
during both peak hours. These northbound queues are a result of limited vehicular storage
due to the closely spaced CSAH 25 Frontage Road rather than an intersection capacity
issue.
• The proposed development is located south of the CSAH 25 Frontage Road between
France Avenue and Glenhurst Avenue in the City of St. Louis Park. The site is currently
occupied by several land uses, all of which are planned to be replaced by the proposed
development. Construction of the proposed development, which consists of approximately
147 apartment units, 10,000 square feet of general office space, and 10,000 square feet of
medical office space was assumed to be complete by the end of the year 2016. Access to the
proposed development is planned in three locations:
o Along a southern extension of France Avenue approximately 270 feet south of the
CSAH 25 Frontage Road.
o Along Glenhurst Avenue approximately 300 feet south of the CSAH 25 Frontage Road.
o Along the CSAH 25 Frontage Road (one-way pick-up/drop-off zone and short-term
parking area).
• To account for general background growth in the area, an annual growth rate of one-half
percent was applied to the existing peak hour traffic volumes to develop year 2017 (i.e. one
year after construction) background traffic forecasts.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 49
Ryan P. Kelley, CNU-A May 1, 2015
City of St. Louis Park Page 14
• The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 103 a.m. peak hour,
128 p.m. peak hour and 1,304 daily trips. This includes a 10 percent modal reduction to
account for available transit options in the area.
o Taking into account trips generated by existing land uses which are already distributed to
the adjacent roadway network, the resultant net new traffic volume impact is
approximately 93 a.m. peak hour, 110 p.m. peak hour and 1,158 daily trips.
• Results of the year 2017 intersection capacity analysis indicate that all study intersections are
expected to continue operating at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and
p.m. peak hours. The previously documented queuing issues at the CSAH 25/France Avenue
intersection do not significantly change due to the proposed development.
• A review of the proposed site plan was completed to identify any issues and recommend
potential improvements with regard to site access, traffic control, and circulation. Key
recommendations and considerations include the following:
o Vehicular and truck maneuverability should be reviewed, particularly for the one-way
pick-up/drop-off zone along the CSAH 25 Frontage Road. Maneuverability should also
be reviewed at the driveway access to the underground parking area.
o Internal traffic controls were not identified. However, traffic controls, signing, and striping
should be incorporated based on the MUTCD. In particular, it is important to identify
traffic controls at intersections between internal roadways/driveways to minimize
vehicular conflicts and driver confusion.
o Due to the addition of development related traffic along Glenhurst Avenue, stop control
should be implemented on the northbound approach of the Glenhurst Avenue/
CSAH 25 Frontage Road intersection to reduce driver confusion.
• Extension of France Avenue from the CSAH 25 Frontage Road to 31st Street would provide
a more direct connection for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Furthermore, the extension
would likely result in a slight redistribution of local traffic patterns. While proposed
development traffic would be expected to utilize France Avenue as far south as the proposed
site access, an additional 200 to 400 daily local vehicles would be expected to utilize
France Avenue if it were extended all the way to 31st Street. These vehicles are primarily
expected to be those of existing local residents utilizing the improved France Avenue
connection to CSAH 25. It should be noted that at extension of France Avenue to 31st Street
would also provide improved bicyclist/pedestrian connectivity with transit stops along
CSAH 25 and the adjacent Frontage Road.
• Several potential future projects within the study area warrant consideration with respect to
the proposed development. These projects include the reconstruction of CSAH 25 as an urban
roadway section, the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) Green Line Extension, and
redevelopment opportunities and their supporting roadway networks. These projects would
likely have an indirect impact to the proposed development. Further discussion regarding these
projects should occur to better understand potential impacts for the proposed development.
H:\Projects\8718\TS\Report\8718_Hwy7&GlenhurstTrafficStudy_150501.docx
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8c)
Title: The Shoreham Development – Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 50
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
• Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary Plat with Subdivision Variances
for Park Commons West, subject to conditions.
• Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary PUD for properties at 4760 and
4900 Excelsior Blvd, subject to conditions.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve the Preliminary Plat?
Does the City Council wish to approve the Preliminary PUD? Preliminary approvals would
allow the developer to submit applications for Final Plat and Final PUD.
SUMMARY: Oppidan requests approvals of a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD for the
properties at 4760 and 4900 Excelsior Blvd to allow construction of a five-story, mixed use
building that includes 28,228 square feet of commercial (specialty grocery store possibly
including a liquor store), 177 apartment units, and structured parking. The PUD is a rezoning of
the property under the City’s new PUD ordinance. The plan includes 18 affordable dwelling
units to comply with City policies.
The Planning Commission reviewed a previous version of the proposal that was six stories tall
and had 189 dwelling units. The Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat
with conditions, denial of the Subdivision Variances, and denial of the Preliminary PUD at its
April 15, 2015 meeting.
City Council met to discuss the proposal on April 27, 2015 at a study session and Oppidan
presented some of the proposed plan revisions to address the issues raised by residents at the
neighborhood meeting and public hearing and by Planning Commissioners.
Please note that the City Council is not adopting the draft ordinance or zoning map amendment
attached to this report as part of the Preliminary PUD. Action on the Preliminary Plat and
Preliminary PUD would allow Oppidan to apply for final approvals. The ordinance and map
amendment will be considered as part of the Final PUD review process.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD
do not have financial implications for the City. The developer has requested tax increment
financing for the project. The request is under review and is tentatively scheduled to be discussed
at a study session on June 8, 2015.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion, Resolutions, Draft Zoning Ordinance, Planning
Commission Meeting Minutes, Proposed Zoning Map Amendment, Traffic Study, Shared
Parking Study, Development Plans
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 2
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Oppidan Development proposes to redevelop the former Bally Total Fitness
block bound by Excelsior Blvd, Quentin Ave S, Princeton Ave S, and Park Commons Dr.
Oppidan requests approvals of a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD for the properties at 4760
and 4900 Excelsior Blvd to allow construction of a five-story, mixed use building that includes
28,228 square feet of commercial (specialty grocery store possibly including a liquor store), 177
apartment units, and structured parking. The PUD is a rezoning of the property under the City’s
new PUD ordinance.
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Site Area: 2.00 acres
Current Zoning:
MX – Mixed Use,
RC – High Density Multiple Family
Proposed Zoning:
PUD – Planned Unit Development
Comp. Plan: M-X Mixed Use
Neighborhood: Wolfe Park
Current Use: Vacant athletic club
building, parking ramp & vacant lot
Adjacent Land Uses:
North: Park Commons Dr, 3-story condominiums, Wolfe Park
East: Princeton Ave S, 4-story mixed-use building
South: Excelsior Blvd, 1 and 2-story commercial buildings
West: Quentin Ave S, 2-story office building
PUD ANALYSIS:
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Mixed-Use and the
current zoning map contemplates mixed-use and high-density residential development on the
property. The proposed PUD would create a new zoning district and zoning regulations for uses
and dimensional standards that are unique to this site and the proposed site and building plans.
The intent of the Mixed Use land use designation and the City’s Livable Communities design
principles is to create compact, pedestrian-scale, mixed-use buildings, typically with retail,
service or other commercial uses on the ground floor and residential or office uses on upper
floors. Mixed-use is intended to accommodate mixed-income housing, a mix of housing types on
the same block, and higher density development.
A redevelopment district was originally established for the Park Commons area in 1977 along
with a redevelopment concept plan. The current Park Commons Concept Plan was created by the
community in the 1990s, including a vision and redevelopment concept focused on creating a
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 3
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
“town center” for St. Louis Park. Although a significant portion of this concept plan has been
realized over the past 15 years, there are some remaining redevelopment opportunities that will
be guided by the Park Commons Concept Plan, including the subject property. The concept plan
provides guidance in the form of principal redevelopment goals, land use mix allocations, street
types, and development performance standards.
The 2020 Comprehensive Plan summarized the Park Commons Concept Plan, including the
following: Density shall be considered overall for the entire development, rather than block by
block or land use designation by land-use designation. Building heights south of Park Commons
Drive will generally be two to four stories, except that a five story residential building may be
considered by PUD at the corner of Monterey and Excelsior Blvd. Building heights north of
Park Commons Drive will generally be six to eight stories. The actual heights of buildings may
vary due to different floor to ceiling heights of different uses. Buildings over four stories in
height should be rendered in such a manner as to retain a human scale at the street level and
minimize the visual impact of the upper stories. One solution is to set back upper floors.
Staff finds that this site is suitable for the proposed mixed-use development and multiple-family
housing and meets many of the objectives for the Park Commons redevelopment area. The
project will follow the City’s Green Building Policy and it is located in a neighborhood that
received LEED-ND certification from the U.S. Green Building Council. Ten percent of the units
will be affordable to households earning 60% of the area median income which provides a
mixed-income development and expands housing choices for the community. The site has
convenient access to good bus service, Wolfe Park, and other services and businesses along
Excelsior Blvd, and is within biking distance of the SWLRT regional trail and future LRT
Beltline and Wooddale stations.
The proposed development is a mixed-use building that promotes efficient use of the land,
existing infrastructure, and existing roadway system. The plan places the majority of the parking
under the building screened from view and utilizes adjacent on-street parking.
The plan provides private designed outdoor recreation area rooftop amenities for its residents on
the second floor. The building design includes active uses at the pedestrian-level along Excelsior
Blvd, including storefront windows, entrances, high quality building materials, and other
measures to enhance the character at the pedestrian level along Excelsior Blvd. Portions of the
upper stories are set back to minimize the visual impact of the building at the pedestrian-level.
Building and Site Design Analysis: The PUD ordinance requires the City to find that the
quality of building and site design proposed will substantially enhance aesthetics of the site and
implement relevant goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the following
criteria shall be satisfied:
(1) The design shall consider the project as a whole, and shall create a unified environment
within project boundaries by ensuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient
vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and
design and efficient use of utilities.
(2) The design of a PUD shall achieve compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses,
both existing and proposed, and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on
surrounding land uses and the potential adverse impacts of the surrounding land uses on the
PUD.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 4
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
(3) A PUD shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy.
(4) The use of green roofs or white roofs and on-site renewable energy is encouraged.
[The remainder of the page is left blank intentionally.]
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 5
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
ZONING ANALYSIS: The following table provides the development metrics. With a PUD,
most of the zoning related concerns can be met. Staff identifies a few items that need additional
attention and these are discussed further in the report.
Zoning Table.
*The applicant requests a reduction based on shared parking opportunities on the site.
Factor Required Proposed Met
?
Use Mixed-use/Residential Mixed-use/Residential Yes
Lot Area 2.0 acres 2.0 acres (1.59 after the plat) Yes
Density Up to 50 units per acre, or more
with a PUD based on the
Comprehensive Plan designation
111.4 units per acre
Yes
Height No maximum with a PUD 66.9 ft. tall; or 74.9 feet to the
top of the trellis feature(s)
Yes
Off-Street
Parking
Parking details provided later in the report.
Yes
Setbacks None with a PUD Front (south) – 5 to 10 ft.
Side (west) – 5 ft.
Side (east) – 1.5 ft. to 5 ft.
Rear (north) – 2.5 ft. to 5 ft.
Yes
Commercial
Use of Ground
Floor Area
None with a PUD 28,228 (45%), plus the lobby
area and rental office
Yes
Ground Floor
Area Ratio
None with a PUD
0.91 Yes
Floor Area
Ratio
None with a PUD
2.4 Yes
D.O.R.A. 8,311 sq. ft. (12%)
Approx. 13,850 sq. ft. (20%) Yes
Tree
Replacement
222.1 caliper inches
($130 per caliper inch not planted)
55 caliper inches +
Cash-in-lieu ($21,593)
Yes
Landscaping 205 trees 22 trees Yes
213 shrubs 61 shrubs, plus perennial,
annual and vine plantings
Alternative landscaping Partial green roof in the terrace
area, green wall elements,
rooftop amenities on 2nd floor
Transit service Frequently operating service
required for a parking reduction
Frequently operating bus
service Route 12, and 615, 604
Yes
Stormwater Required city and watershed
standards
Stormwater management is
provided underground
Yes
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 6
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Architectural Design:
Height: The proposed building is five stories tall and 66.9 feet tall. Per the zoning code, the
height is measured from the front (Excelsior Boulevard/south side). On the north side, due to the
grade change, the parking levels become exposed, so the building height ranges from 71 feet to
78 feet above the grade of Park Commons Drive.
As mentioned previously in the report, the Park Commons Concept Plan provided guidelines that
suggested two to four stories was the appropriate building height in this block of the
redevelopment area. However, the current RC and MX district zoning allow 6 stories or more.
The PUD district has the flexibility to allow taller buildings and smaller setbacks, as the City
Council deems appropriate.
The applicant revision to limit the height of the building to five stories along Excelsior Blvd is
more in keeping with the heights of other recent developments along the north side of the
corridor (Park Commons East-Trader Joe’s, Ellipse on Excelsior, and e2).
Massing:
The massing of the building is broken up with wall deviations on the second though 5th floors.
The central portion of these upper floors step back 6 feet from the first floor elevation along
Excelsior Blvd and Park Commons Drive. On the Princeton Avenue side it steps back 35 feet
and on Quentin it is opens up entirely with a 155 feet setback for the rooftop terrace.
There would be upper level decks that hang over these spaces, but overall this approach helps
add visual interest to the building and helps reduce the impact of the building on the public realm
at the pedestrian level.
Pedestrian-level design elements: The grocery store has storefront windows all along Excelsior
Blvd and has an entrance from the public sidewalk, as well as an entrance oriented to the first
floor parking under the building. The apartment lobby entrance and rental office is at the corner
of Excelsior Boulevard and Princeton Avenue and also provides an active presence along the
sidewalk. The PUD ordinance will include transparency requirements for the storefront
windows along Excelsior Boulevard.
The storefront glass wraps around the front of the building along Quentin Avenue near the
angled parking; however, here the glass is proposed to be opaque, so there will not be views into
the store likely due to shelving against this interior wall. A green wall is shown near this corner,
too, and the plans indicate this could change to a graphic image instead of the green wall.
On the east side of the building along Princeton, there are staircases that lead up to individual
apartment units. These staircases, along with foundation plantings add to the pedestrian
experience.
On the north side of the building, the walls of the lower parking levels are exposed on this side.
The parking housed inside this part of the building will be screened by this wall. The landscape
plan proposes vines along the foundation of this wall to help soften the building and mitigate the
236 feet of wall. There will also be decorative metal screens on the first floor parking level,
which helps break up this wall horizontally, though it is mostly above the pedestrian level.
Exterior Materials: The exterior materials include brick, glass, stucco, fiber cement. The
building meets the minimum requirements for Class I materials.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 7
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
However, the plans suggest that burnished block may be substituted for the proposed stucco at
the base of the building. The applicant appears to be requesting the burnished concrete block be
counted as a Class I material. Burnished concrete block is specifically listed as a Class II
material. Staff does not support including it as a Class I material. Staff is open to use of
burnished block at the building base only if the class I material percentages are held at or above
60% per elevation by increasing the use of Class I materials elsewhere on the facades.
Shadowing: The shadow study provided by the architect certifies that the building meets the
City’s shadowing requirements. It states there are not any days out of the year that the building
will shadow a neighboring building elevation more than is allowed by code.
Density: The current zoning of Mixed-Use and High Density Residential zoning districts allow
densities of 50 to 75 units per acre. With the PUD zoning district, the density may be increased
further. The proposed density is 111.4 units per acre.
The appropriateness of the density can be further evaluated based upon projected parking
demand and traffic impacts. As described in later sections of this report, the development does
not significant impact on the overall level of service of the surrounding intersections and the
parking requirements have been met.
Parking: The revised plan (fewer units) provides the number of parking stalls required by the
zoning code without any reductions. The commercial use of the building is eligible for the ten
percent transit reduction, which would reduce the required parking by 11 spaces. A summary of
the parking required and provided is explained in the table below.
There are 99 spaces available at the first floor/ground level. Of the 99, 66 spaces are under the
building on the first level and 33 are on-street parking spaces surrounding the site. The P1 and
P2 parking levels will have secured access and not readily available to commercial customers or
residential guests.
The mix of commercial and residential uses provides an opportunity for shared parking, since
each of these uses have different peak hours of demand. Although, the number of stalls that
would be available to share may be somewhat limited, due to the desire for secure parking for
residents and convenient parking for customers. However, staff believes some shared use will be
critical to the success of the project and providing adequate parking for the development. With
Off-Street
Parking
Requirement
Required Parking Proposed Parking
224 bedrooms 224 spaces Underground spaces
(P1, P2 levels),
including 23 tandem
240 spaces
Commercial
(28,228 sq. ft.)
113 spaces 1st level off-street (66)
and on-street (33)
parking spaces
99 spaces
Minimum required
without reductions
337 spaces Total provided 339 spaces
10% transit reduction (11 spaces ) 10% reduction
Minimum required
with reduction
326 spaces Total provided 339 spaces
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 8
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
proper management, there is an opportunity to share spaces in the P1 Level of the building with
employees of the commercial use and possibly accommodate guest parking for the residential
use.
The City commissioned a shared parking study, at the developer’s expense, that was prepared by
Walker Parking Consultants. The parking study was based on 189 dwelling units, not the 177
units now proposed. Based on the information in that study, if approximately 20 parking stalls in
the P1 Level are available for use by commercial employees and/or residential guests, the site
will meet the projected peak parking demands. The developer agrees to allow 20 stalls to be
shared with the commercial tenant(s) and can provide additional details regarding the parking
management plan later in the review process. Staff recommends that a permanent agreement for
shared parking and a parking management plan be provided to the City for review and approval.
The plan also provides the bicycle parking as required by City Code requirements. There will be
a combination of secured parking for the residents in the building and exterior customer and
guest bike parking at the sidewalk level.
Access: The site can be accessed from all four surrounding streets. There is on-street parking, a
bus stop, and sidewalk access directly from Excelsior Boulevard. The “commercial” parking lot
on the main level has two full access points. One is on Princeton Avenue and the other on
Quentin. The parking lot design allows an efficient movement for vehicles through the parking
lot. Also, the access to the secured parking for “residential” parking is off of Park Commons
Drive and separate from the commercial parking. On-street parking is also provided on Quentin
Avenue, Park Commons Drive and Princeton Avenue with sidewalk connections around the
entire site.
The proposed loading area for the grocery store is similar to the Trader Joe’s building with trucks
backing up from the street into the loading area off of Quentin Avenue. The depth is sufficient
that semi-tractor trailers will not block traffic on Quentin, and shorter service vehicles will not
impede the sidewalks.
Traffic: A traffic study by Spack Consulting was submitted with the application. The study was
based on the previously proposed 189 units, so the reduction to 177 units will reduce the number
of trips generated from the residential use. A copy of the study is attached for your review
(Appendices C and D were excluded due to the size of the report).
The study concludes that the impact of the proposed development traffic generation will not
significantly impact the level of service for the intersections surrounding the site or Excelsior
Boulevard adjacent to the site. The study concludes that no mitigation is required. The
Engineering Department reviewed the study and did not dispute the findings.
Setbacks: The plan provides setbacks ranging from five feet to 10.0 feet on the south side, 5.0
feet on the west side, and 1.5 feet to 5.0 feet on the east side, and 2.5 feet to 5.0 feet on the north
side. In a PUD, buildings may be built to the property line.
Some of the decks are built over, and the staircases along Princeton Avenue are built upon,
drainage and utility easements. Since overhead utilities would be discouraged in these locations,
and space is available on the Quentin side, the City Council may allow these encroachments
provided the property owner is responsible for the costs to remove the stairs or decks if needed to
access the easements for public purposes.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 9
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA): The plan indicates 17% of the lot area is
provided for DORA. By staff’s calculation approximately 20% of the area is eligible for DORA.
These spaces are provided exclusively on the private rooftop terraces. The plan meets the
DORA requirement.
Landscaping: The landscaping plan provides 22 of the 205 trees required on the site. It
provides 61 of the 213 shrubs required. The plan includes perennials, annuals and vines on the
site as well. All of the trees provided will be street boulevard trees and arranged in landscaped
boulevard areas.
The Excelsior Boulevard streetscape has been redesigned to incorporate additional boulevard
landscaping, instead of relying on trees in grates/vaults. The plan also incorporates sodded
boulevards, foundation plantings, or a combination thereof. The plan also tries to balance other
interests of maintenance, maintaining visibility of the storefront, and accessibility of the on-street
parking.
There are alternative landscaping components provided, including the partial green roof, green
wall, and amenities on the second floor terraces.
As part of the final PUD review the applicant developer must provide structured soil details for
all the landscaped areas, and such details should use best practices to promote tree health and
tree growth. Additional adjustments to the planting plan may be suggested. Incorporation of
public art at the pedestrian-level would be welcome in the final design and bolster the alternative
landscaping.
Tree Replacement: A number of trees on public and private land will be removed to
accommodate the planned development. The tree replacement requirement is 222.1 caliper
inches. The proposed planting plan provides 55 caliper inches. Therefore, as currently designed,
a $21,593 fee for cash-in-lieu of plantings would be collected and directed to the City’s tree
fund.
Waste Storage: The trash is proposed to be managed inside the building. The residential trash
and recycling rooms are in the P1 Level. Garbage haulers will roll the trash out to the truck and
back into the building to avoid trash cans being stored outside on collection days. The
commercial trash and recycling will be stored within the loading area under the building near
Quentin Avenue. Hours of waste collection is limited by the City’s licensing rules. Both trash
and recycling chutes will be provided in the building.
Utilities: Most of the staff comments regarding utilities that were presented in the Planning
Commission staff report were incorporated into the revised plans to staff’s satisfaction. Only
one issue remains.
Stormwater from the site will be stored underground and under the building. The storm water
plan directs the discharge to an existing 15” storm sewer on the northeast corner of the property.
An existing 30-inch storm sewer is available on the northwest corner of the property that has
more capacity. There are a few different solutions available to this issue, so staff is confident the
issue can be adequately addressed. The applicant must resolve this prior to City Council
consideration of the Final PUD.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 10
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
The plan requires review and approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD).
PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH VARIANCES ANALYSIS: The preliminary plat, called “Park
Commons West,” combines two lots into one new parcel, dedicates right-of-way to surrounding
streets where street easements currently exist, and it provides drainage and utility easements
surrounding the parcel adjacent to the proposed right-of-way.
Lot: Lot 1, Block 1, Park Commons West will have a lot area of 1.59 acres. This lot is proposed
to be developed with a mixed-use building with 28,228 square feet of ground floor commercial
and 177 multiple-family residential units with parking under the building. The lot covers an
entire block bound on four sides by public roadways.
Block: The block is approximately 290 feet wide by 260 feet deep. It has a perimeter of 1,147
feet which approaches the optimal block size of 1,300 feet prescribed by the subdivision
ordinance.
Right-of-Way Dedication: The area dedicated to surrounding streets replaces existing road
easements. Hennepin County reviewed the proposal and did not provide any comments.
Utility Easements: The plan provides a 10-foot wide drainage and utility easement along
Excelsior Boulevard as required by the Subdivision Ordinance.
Subdivision Variances Application: The applicant is requesting variances to allow 5-feet wide
drainage and utility easements along Quentin Avenue South, Park Commons Drive, and
Princeton Avenue South, instead of 10 feet wide easements.
The Developer provided the following arguments to support the request in the application that
the variances are justified for the following reasons:
1. The design as proposed is consistent with the properties in the immediate area. The
sidewalk width, landscaping, on-street parking and transit connections keep the integrity of
Excelsior Boulevard and the surrounding streets while continuing the walking, biking and
transit corridor accessibility to City residents. No negative impacts are apparent by granting
this request.
2. The challenges to create viable access both to parking and pedestrian, adequate circulation
and new stormwater facilities (no on-site stormwater exists today on either site), the need to
keep active streets and connections, coupled with the cost of the land and demolition of the
current building (including abatement costs) drive this request.
3. The current site conditions and grades create added access challenges to this site. For
example, if the full 10 feet were provided, the ramping into the Quentin Avenue side would
become steeper (over 5% grade) to meet the current street elevation and the building
finished floor, creating an undesirable condition for residents and retail patrons. Similar
issues would be created for the access on Park Commons and Princeton and there would also
be impacts in the delivery area to the retail. There would also be potential conflicts in the
stairway areas leading to the exits for residents.
4. The overall building layout for common space would be impacted. By shrinking the
footprint to provide the required depth, common facilities (roof green deck, dog run, etc.)
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 11
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
would be minimized and not meet the needs of the residents or desires of the
development and the City.
5. The benefits to the community and surrounding properties are many. Continued
connectivity, added services, new stormwater facilities on-site (no on-site storm water
facility exists today), added affordable housing units in the area and a new, modern
facility to anchor this gateway location will enhance the look and feel of the area.
6. The requested changes would have very little impact to the City for the use of the area.
Utilities are primarily on the north and south sides of the building and impacts are very
minimal.
Evaluation: City staff supports the requested Preliminary Plat with Subdivision Variances based
on the grounds above; however, the support is contingent upon several amendments to the plans.
Staff has remaining concerns regarding certain elements of the proposed site, building and utility
plans that relate somewhat to the easement areas provided.
Certain private improvements are shown within public drainage and utility easements and public
right-of-way. Specifically, along Princeton Avenue, there are encroachments into the proposed
drainage and utility easements including stairways to individual units and long private service
lines for communications and gas. Also, upper level decks extend over the drainage and utility
easements. These encroachments could hinder the public purpose of these easements. These
encroachments should be allowed only if an encroachment agreement is entered into that makes
the property owner responsible for the costs of removing such encroachments or other related
costs for public use and maintenance of the easements. The applicant offered this option and
agrees to it.
The Planning Commission recommended denial of the Subdivision Variances.
Park and Trail Dedication: The proposed development would increase the intensity of the
development on the property. The City will require park and trail dedication fees to be collected
for the residential units that are being added to the site. The Park and Recreation Advisory
Commission will be asked to make a recommendation regarding collecting cash-in-lieu of land
prior to the final plat or final PUD. The current park dedication fee is $1,500 per dwelling unit
and the trail dedication fee is $225 per dwelling unit.
PUBLIC INPUT: The Developer held a neighborhood meeting on Wednesday, April 8, to
present the proposed development, respond to questions, and learn about resident’s concerns.
The meeting was well-attended with approximately 60 people.
The major concerns expressed at neighborhood meeting included: 1) traffic, including congestion
on Excelsior Boulevard, capacity of the Quentin Avenue intersection, and cut through traffic in
the neighborhoods to the south and on Park Commons Boulevard; 2) adequate parking and
access; 3) the building height, including the fit in the area, the impact to the feel along the
sidewalks, block views/sun, and general density of the development; and 4) the sustainability of
the market demand for more apartments and another grocery store in this area.
Other issues that were mentioned included hours of operation for the grocery store, the similarity
of the building design to Ellipse on Excelsior and other recent developments, lighting impacts,
and property tax impacts if the City provides financial assistance to the developer.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 12
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
There were also several residents that attended and spoke at the public hearing on April 15, 2015.
Minutes from the Planning Commission meeting are attached.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
As previously stated in the report, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
Preliminary Plat with conditions; recommended denial of the Subdivision Variances; and
recommended denial of the Preliminary PUD.
Following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant made revisions to the proposal to try
to address concerns raised by the Planning Commissioners and other public input. Based on the
revised plans, staff is recommending approval of the applications with the conditions in the
resolutions.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 13
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION GRANTING APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH
SUBDIVISION VARIANCES FOR PERIMETER DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENTS
PARK COMMONS WEST
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park:\
Findings
1. Oppidan Development, subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as Park
Commons West has submitted an application for approval of preliminary plat of said subdivision
in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all
proceedings have been duly had thereunder.
2. The proposed preliminary plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with
the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the
ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park.
3. The proposed preliminary and final plat is situated upon the following described
lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit:
Outlot H, PARK COMMONS EAST, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
And:
Commencing at a point in the center line of Excelsior Avenue distant 313.25 feet
Northeasterly from its intersection with the Westerly line of the Northeast Quarter
of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County,
Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles from the center line of said
Excelsior Avenue a distance of 310.0 feet; thence Northeasterly along a line
parallel to said center line to the most Westerly comer of Registered Land Survey
No. 832; thence Southeasterly along the Westerly line of said Registered Land
Survey and its extension Southeasterly to the center line of Excelsior Avenue;
thence Southwesterly along said center line to the place of beginning; all in said
Section 7, Township 28, Range 24, according to the United States Government
Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
4. There are special circumstances affecting the property such that the strict
application of the provisions of the subdivision ordinance would deprive the applicant/owner of
the reasonable use of the land.
5. Granting the variances will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and
welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which the property is situated. Granting
variances to allow 5.0 feet wide perimeter drainage and utility easements along the north, east,
and west property lines of Lot 1, Block 1 on the Plat will not impair the ability to accommodate
needed utilities to serve the development. The present road right-of-way and proposed drainage
and utility easements will accommodate existing and proposed utilities.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 14
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
6. The variances correct inequities resulting from the topography of the site.
7. The variances are not contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The
Comprehensive Plan calls for such lands to be redeveloped and to include certain elements, such
as stormwater management, structured parking, sidewalks, and buildings located close to the
street. Such redevelopment on this site could not occur without the requested subdivision
variances.
Conclusion
1. The proposed preliminary plat with subdivision variances of Park Commons West
is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all
ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of
Minnesota, provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City
Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk subject to the following conditions:
A. The final plat application shall be consistent with the City Council resolution,
Official Exhibits, Development Agreement and City Code.
B. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure
cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building
design and 100% screened from off-site.
C. Tree replacement and park and trail dedication fees shall be paid to the City of St.
Louis Park.
D. A financial security in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit in the
amount of $1,000 shall be submitted to the City to insure that a signed Mylar copy
of the final plat is provided to the City.
E. A permanent shared parking agreement between the commercial and residential
uses shall be recorded upon filing of the final plat and prior to issuance of
building permits for the development. Said agreement shall be in a form
approved by the City Attorney.
F. A development agreement shall be executed, if final plat and final PUD
applications are approved, between the City and Developer that addresses, at a
minimum:
1) A performance guarantee for 1.25 times the estimated costs for the
installation of all public improvements, placement of iron monuments
at property corners, landscaping and irrigation.
2). The applicant shall reimburse City attorney’s fees in drafting and
reviewing such documents as required in the final plat approval.
3). Prior to starting any land disturbing activities (excluding building
demolition), the following conditions shall be met:
a. City approval of the final plat.
b. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the City.
c. Assent Form and Official Exhibits must be signed by the applicant
and property owner(s).
d. Final construction plans for all public improvements shall be
signed by a registered engineer and submitted to the City Engineer
for review and approval.
e. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate
development, construction, private utility, and City representatives.
f. All necessary permits must be obtained.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 15
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
g. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or
irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St.
Louis Park for all public improvements (sidewalks, utilities,
street lights, landscaping, irrigation, etc.) and the private site
landscaping.
h. Encroachment agreement that assigns to the property owner the
responsibility and costs for removing decks and stairs located upon
or above public easements and other related costs for public use
and maintenance of the easements.
G. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be
met:
1) Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the City.
2) Assent Form and Official Exhibits must be signed by the applicant and
property owner(s).
3) Final construction plans for all public improvements shall be signed by a
registered engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for review and
approval.
4) A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development,
construction, private utility, and City representatives.
5) All necessary permits must be obtained.
6) A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter
of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park for all public
improvements (sidewalks, utilities, street lights, landscaping, irrigation,
etc.) and private site landscaping.
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution
to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein.
3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts
required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on
behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth in Paragraph
No. 1 above and the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code have been fulfilled.
4. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required
under Section 26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of
proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above
described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality.
The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the
Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 16
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
RESOLUTION NO. 15-___
RESOLUTION APPROVING A
PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
LOCATED AT
4760 AND 4900 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD
4900 EXCELSIOR
WHEREAS, Oppidan Development submitted an application for approval of a
Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD); and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan guides the site for Mixed Use development
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the MX Mixed Use and RC High
Density Multiple Family zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, proposed mixed-use development includes 28,228 square feet of
commercial space and 177 dwelling units is consistent with the designations and the density
proposed may be allowed with a PUD; and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was mailed to all owners
of property within 350 feet of the subject property; and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was published in the St.
Louis Park Sailor on April 2, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held the public hearing at the meeting of April
15, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended denial of the Preliminary PUD; on
a 4-0 vote; and
WHEREAS, the applicant subsequently made revisions to the plan to address concerns
raised by the Planning Commission;
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report, Planning Commission
minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments
in the record of decision.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Oppidan Development has made application to the City Council for a Preliminary
Planned Unit Development located at 4760 and 4900 Excelsior Boulevard for the legal
description as follows, to-wit:
Outlot H, PARK COMMONS EAST, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 17
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
And:
Commencing at a point in the center line of Excelsior Avenue distant 313.25 feet
Northeasterly from its intersection with the Westerly line of the Northeast Quarter
of the Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County,
Minnesota; thence Northwesterly at right angles from the center line of said
Excelsior Avenue a distance of 310.0 feet; thence Northeasterly along a line
parallel to said center line to the most Westerly comer of Registered Land Survey
No. 832; thence Southeasterly along the Westerly line of said Registered Land
Survey and its extension Southeasterly to the center line of Excelsior Avenue;
thence Southwesterly along said center line to the place of beginning; all in said
Section 7, Township 28, Range 24, according to the United States Government
Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 15-04-PUD) and the effect of the proposed PUD on the health, safety and
welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the
effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive
Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The City Council has determined that the PUD will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion or
hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also
determined that the proposed PUD is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the
Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The contents of Planning Case File 15-04-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of
the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The Preliminary Planned Unit Development at the location described is approved based on the
findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions:
1. The plans must receive approval of the Final PUD ordinance by the City Council.
2. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the PUD ordinance,
Official Exhibits, Development Agreement and City Code.
3. Burnished concrete block shall not be substituted as a Class I material. Burnished
concrete may only be used if the Class I material percentages remain at 60% or more on
each elevation by increasing the use of Class I materials elsewhere on the facades.
4. A permanent agreement for shared parking and a parking management plan shall be
submitted to the City prior to City Council review of the Final PUD.
5. The City and developer shall enter into an encroachment agreement that assigns to the
property owner the responsibility and costs for removing decks and stairs located upon or
above public easements and other related costs for public use and maintenance of the
easements.
6. The plans shall be revised to adequately address drainage and utility issues in a manner
acceptable to the City Engineer and Building Official.
7. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met:
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 18
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
a. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the City.
b. Assent Form and Official Exhibits must be signed by the applicant and property
owner.
c. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development,
construction, private utility, and City representatives.
d. All necessary permits must be obtained.
8. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following conditions shall be met:
a. The developer shall sign the City's Assent Form and the Official Exhibits.
b. A development agreement shall be executed between the Developer and City that
addresses, at a minimum:
1. The conditions of PUD approval as applicable or appropriate.
2. Participation by the property owner in the special service district relating
to maintenance of streetscape improvement within the public right-of-way
along Excelsior Boulevard.
3. Installation and on-going maintenance at Developer’s expense of on-street
loading and streetscape improvements along all public streets adjacent to
the site. Final plans for said improvements shall be submitted to the City
Engineer for review and approval prior to construction.
4. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter
of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the amount of
125% of the costs of all public improvements (street, sidewalks, utility,
street lights, landscaping, etc.), placement of iron monuments at the
property corners, and the private site stormwater management system and
landscaping.
5. The developer shall reimburse City attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing
such documents as required in the final PUD approval.
6. Final construction plans for all public improvements shall be signed by a
registered engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for review and
approval.
7. Building material samples and colors must be submitted to the City for
review.
9. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no
construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through
Friday, and between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends. No construction activity
shall occur on Sundays and holidays. Limited exceptions to these construction
hours may be permitted if the City issues a noise permit.
b. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighborhood
properties.
c. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary.
d. The City shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a public
street.
e. Work in a public street shall take place only upon the determination by the
Director of Engineering (or designee) that appropriate safety measures have been
taken to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety.
f. The developer and general contractor shall implement and enforce a parking plan
for construction equipment and vehicles, and workers’ vehicles, which minimizes
or eliminates parking in the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 19
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
g. The developer shall install and maintain chain link security fencing that is at least
six feet tall along the perimeter of the site. All gates and access points shall be
locked during non-working hours.
h. Temporary electric power connections shall not adversely impact surrounding
neighborhood service.
i. Pedestrian access along Excelsior Boulevard and to the existing bus stop shall be
maintained during construction. Any expected disruptions shall be limited in
duration and scope, and communicated to the City, County, and Metropolitan
Transit well in advance.
10. Prior to the issuance of any permanent certificate of occupancy permit public
improvements and private site landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance
with the Official Exhibits.
11. All utilities shall be buried underground.
12. All mechanical equipment shall be fully screened.
13. The materials used in and placement of all signs shall be integrated with the building
design and architecture.
In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750
per violation of any condition of this approval.
Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, the City will require execution of a development agreement as
a condition of approval of the final PUD. The development agreement shall address those issues
which the City Council deems appropriate and necessary. The Mayor and City Manager are
authorized to execute the development agreement upon final PUD approval.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 18, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 20
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. ___-15
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY
CREATING SECTION 36-268-PUD 2 AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4760 AND 4900
EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Findings
Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 15-03-S and 15-04-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance to create a
new Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District.
Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Mixed Use.
Sec. 3. The legal description for the property this PUD applies to is as follows:
Outlot H, PARK COMMONS EAST, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
And:
Commencing at a point in the center line of Excelsior Avenue distant 313.25 feet
Northeasterly from its intersection with the Westerly line of the Northeast Quarter of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 7, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota;
thence Northwesterly at right angles from the center line of said Excelsior Avenue a
distance of 310.0 feet; thence Northeasterly along a line parallel to said center line to the
most Westerly comer of Registered Land Survey No. 832; thence Southeasterly along the
Westerly line of said Registered Land Survey and its extension Southeasterly to the
center line of Excelsior Avenue; thence Southwesterly along said center line to the place
of beginning; all in said Section 7, Township 28, Range 24, according to the United
States Government Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
(To be platted and legally described as)
Lot 1, Block 1, Park Commons West, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and
to the center line of all adjacent right-of-way.
Sec. 4. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the
following Planned Unit Development Zoning District:
Section 36-268-PUD 2.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 21
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
(a). Development Plan
The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following
Final PUD signed Official Exhibits:
[Insert Final List]
The site shall also conform to the following requirements:
(1) The property shall be developed with 177 multiple family dwelling units and
28,228 square feet of commercial space.
(2) Parking will be provided in parking ramps and adjacent on-street parking bays.
Three-hundred thirty-nine (339) parking spaces will be provided: 240 spaces for
residential units, 66 spaces for commercial uses, and 33 on-street spaces. At least
20 of parking spaces for residential uses on Level P1 will be available for shared
parking for employees of the commercial uses and/or residential guest parking.
(3) The maximum building height will be 67 feet and six stories tall, plus up to an
additional 10 feet for rooftop metal trellis architectural elements.
(4) The development site shall include a minimum of 12 percent designed outdoor
recreation area based on private developable land area.
(b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the PUD 2 district.
(1) Multiple family uses.
(c) Uses permitted with conditions. The following uses in the PUD 2 district may be
used for one or more of the following uses if it complies with the conditions specified for
those uses below:
(1) Commercial uses. Commercial uses limited to the following: banks without drive-
up facilities, food service, grocery stores, large item retail, liquor store, medical or
dental office, offices, private entertainment (indoor), retail, service, showrooms
and studios. These commercial uses shall also meet the following conditions:
a. Commercial uses are limited to the first floor.
b. Hours of operation for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m.
c. In -vehicle sales or service is prohibited.
d. Restaurants are prohibited.
e. Outdoor storage is prohibited.
(2) Civic and institutional uses. Civic and institutional uses are limited to the
following: education/academic, indoor public parks/open space, libraries,
museums/art galleries, police service substations, post office customer service
facilities, public studios and performance theaters.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 22
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
(d) Accessory uses
Accessory uses are as follows:
(1) Parking ramps.
(2) Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and
not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use.
(3) Home occupations complying with all of the conditions in the R-C district.
(4) Catering, if accessory to a food service, grocery store or retail bakery.
(5) No outdoor uses or storage allowed.
(f) Special Performance Standards
(1) All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance must
be met, including but not limited to outdoor lighting, architectural design,
landscaping and all screening requirements.
(2) All trash handling and loading areas must be inside of the building and screened
from view.
(3) Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the approved redevelopment plan
or final PUD site plan and development agreement in accordance with the
following conditions:
a. Pylon signs are not permitted;
b. Freestanding monument signs shall utilize the same exterior materials as the
principal buildings and shall not interfere with pedestrian/bicycle or
automobile circulation and visibility;
c. Pedestrian-scale signs visible from public sidewalks shall be encouraged.
Such signs shall be no more than three feet in vertical dimension unless flush
with the building wall; and
d. Maximum allowable numbers, sizes and heights shall be regulated by section
36-362 except as specifically modified by the redevelopment plan or final
PUD site plan and development agreement at the sole discretion of the city
council.
(4) Façade. The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground
floor non-residential facades located in the Mixed-Use building facing Excelsior
Boulevard:
a. Façade Transparency. Windows and doors shall meet the following
requirements:
1. For street-facing facades, no more than 10% of total window and door
area shall be glass block, mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass,
finishes or material including window painting and signage. The
remaining 90% of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted
glass, allowing views into and out of the interior.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 23
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
2. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum depth of three
feet. This requirement shall not prohibit the display of merchandise.
Display windows may be used to meet the transparency requirement.
(5) Awnings.
a. Awnings must be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass.
Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited.
b. Backlit awnings are prohibited.
(6) Use of Sidewalk. A business may use that portion of a sidewalk extending a
maximum of five feet from the building wall for the following purposes, provided
a six-foot minimum horizontal clearance along Excelsior Boulevard and France
Avenue is maintained between obstructions on public sidewalks and provided that
all activity is occurring on private property:
a. Display of merchandise.
b. Benches, planters, ornaments and art.
c. Signage, as permitted in the zoning ordinance.
d. Dining areas may extend beyond five feet of the building, provided eight
feet minimum horizontal clearance along Excelsior Boulevard and France
Avenue is maintained between the obstructions on the sidewalk.
Sec. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 15-03-S and 15-04-PUD are hereby entered
into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Sec. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Public Hearing April 15, 2015
First Reading
Second Reading
Date of Publication
Date Ordinance takes effect
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council ___________
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 24
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
EXCERPT OF
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 15, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Carl Robertson, Joe
Tatalovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
The meeting was called to order at 6:08 p.m. by Vice Chair Johnston-Madison.
2. Approval of Minutes of April 1, 2015
Commissioner Carper moved approval of the minutes of April 1, 2015. The minutes
were seconded by Commissioner Robertson, and the motion passed on a vote of 3-0-1
(Tatalovich abstained).
3. Public Hearings
***
C. Preliminary Plat with Subdivision Variances and Preliminary PUD Zoning
Location: 4760 and 4900 Excelsior Boulevard
Applicant: Oppidan, Inc.
Case No.: 15-03-S and 15-04-PUD
Sean Walther, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. The request would allow
construction of a six-story, mixed use building with 28,228 square feet of commercial
(specialty grocery store possibly including a liquor store), 189 apartment units, and
structured parking. The PUD is a rezoning of the property under the City’s new PUD
ordinance.
Mr. Walther spoke about the grade of the site sloping from south to north. The building
is six stories tall. At the sides of the property along Quentin and Princeton the building
does step down, but as the grade changes, the underground parking below the building
becomes exposed. Essentially the building will look about 75 feet and about 6 stories tall
on both the north and south sides of the development.
In his discussion about landscaping, Mr. Walther spoke about vine plantings which are
proposed along some of the building walls especially along the north side where the
exposed parking walls are located. He also spoke about a proposed partial “green wall”
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 25
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
element along the Quentin Ave. side. Mr. Walther noted that staff is recommending
some additional improvements to the landscaping.
Mr. Walther discussed parking, access and the traffic study. He stated that the traffic
study concluded the proposed development will have little impact on the adjacent street
operations and intersections.
Mr. Walther said the staff report includes a number of suggested revisions to the
proposed plan including landscaping, utility plan, the removal of stairways proposed
along Princeton Ave., and additional attention to waste storage and handling. Staff is
requesting that those revisions be incorporated before the request goes to the City
Council.
Commissioner Robertson asked for the rationale behind the subdivision variance request.
Mr. Walther explained that five feet appears to be adequate along Quentin Ave. S., Park
Commons Dr., and Princeton Ave. S. for proposed and future utility needs surrounding
the property. The 10-foot easements along Excelsior Blvd. and the existing 66 ft. wide
right-of-way of Quentin Ave. S. also provide adequate space for future utility needs to
serve both the site and the surrounding area.
Commissioner Carper spoke about the transit service parking reduction and asked where
the bus stops are located.
Mr. Walther responded that an existing bus stop is in front of the building site on the
northeast corner of Quentin and Excelsior (Route 12). There is also a bus stop on the
southwest corner of Quentin and Excelsior (Route 12). He added that there are also two
other circulator routes in that area.
Commissioner Carper asked about proposed parking spaces and bus pull-out lane.
Mr. Walther stated that bus drivers prefer to stay out in the lane and to stop along the
street curb.
Commissioner Carper asked why that doesn’t occur at Excelsior & Grand.
Mr. Walther responded that was probably a local preference and Metro Transit agreed to
do so.
Commissioner Carper asked about building heights from Monterey down to the Bally’s
site.
Mr. Walther said the Trader Joe’s building at Monterey is a five-story building and is 63
feet tall. The first and second phases of Excelsior & Grand are four-story buildings and
50 feet tall. The proposed development is 75 feet tall to the roof and 85 feet tall to the
roof top terrace structures.
Commissioner Carper asked about the Excelsior & Grand easement.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 26
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Mr. Walther said no drainage and utility easements were provided in the Excelsior and
Grand development, although the buildings are set back 5 feet from the property lines.
He added that the City did require additional right-of-way dedications, but there are no
drainage and utility easements provided. He noted that similar reductions were done for
the Ellipse development as well as the Shops at West End.
Commissioner Carper asked why the main entrance to the grocery store is on Excelsior
Blvd. when the majority of the parking is behind the building.
Mr. Walther responded this relates to how the building design addresses the street and
sidewalks along the front of the building in order to create a more pedestrian-friendly
environment along that public space. He spoke about the other access point from the
parking lot that will allow customers to come into a vestibule space and move into the
grocery store. While there may be more customers entering from the parking spaces
behind the grocery store, having an entry from Excelsior Boulevard and maintaining
access into the building from the public sidewalk is needed and required to encourage use
of the on-street parking and transit to access the site.
Commissioner Carper asked if the long wall would be made out of Class I materials. He
asked if there would be any textural elements on the wall.
Mr. Walther said there are some details added at the corners of the building. It changes
from the brick material to the stucco material in the center, and both are considered Class
I materials. Boulevard landscaping and trees will be located there. Vine plantings are
proposed along the foundation of the wall to soften the appearance of the wall at the
pedestrian level.
Commissioner Carper asked if any kind of differentiation on the wall can be required.
Mr. Walther stated that the developer is meeting the minimum Class I material
requirement on the site. He added that as a Planned Unit Development there is the
ability to request or require additional changes to the project.
Commissioner Carper spoke about the short growing season for vine plantings.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison discussed the Excelsior & Grand concept of four stories
which she said seems more appropriate for the area.
Commissioner Robertson asked about adaptability of the grocery store space if the use
needs to change.
Mr. Walther stated that building does have some flexibility. The struggle may be more
about the access from the rear of the property. A common corridor might be needed for
multiple uses for both customers and shared use of the loading dock. He added that there
are opportunities for additional entrances along the street as well as along Quentin Ave.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said the location of the liquor sales portion of the store will
be important regarding deliveries. She asked hours of operation for the store.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 27
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Mr. Walther said deliveries will be made off of Quentin Ave. Trucks would enter from
Quentin, and back into the loading dock area. Delivery times could be included as a
condition of approval if desired. The developer stated at the neighborhood meeting that
the grocery store hours of operation could be from 6 a.m. to midnight.
The applicant Paul Tucci, Oppidan, said the architectural element going up to 85 feet is
trellis, but rooftop decks are not proposed in those areas. He said they anticipate having
20 affordable units in the building. He discussed parking and said they are comfortable
that they have met the City’s parking ordinance requirements.
Mr. Tucci discussed the traffic study conducted by Spack Consulting.
Mr. Tucci said at one time they looked at doing four stories but in order to include
affordable housing and make their numbers work they needed to increase their unit count.
He spoke about working with the setback, the ability to get the unit count necessary and
the resulting elevation.
Mr. Tucci said there is some potential to do a planted wall area. He described a series of
small potted vines which are not designed to be 12 month vines. A mural was a
possibility.
Mr. Tucci discussed the retail and the market study. Delivery restrictions have not been
discussed with the grocery company yet. Reasonable delivery times can be
accommodated.
Commissioner Carper asked for more information about the sixth story.
Mr. Tucci said the sixth story is primarily on the front 25% of the building with 12
residential units. There is a decorative trellis element on the ends of the building.
Commissioner Carper asked how the proposed stairway area would be redesigned.
Mr. Tucci explained there wouldn’t be a full foundation at the bottom of the stairs. It
would be more like a patio footing. He said they requested the variance with the caveat
that they would do some kind of encroachment agreement so if the city needed to do
work it would be the developer’s responsibility to pay for the removal and reconstruction
of the stairway.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said she is concerned that the traffic study is very positive
in its assumptions. She said residents at the neighborhood meeting expressed concern
about cut-through traffic.
Mr. Walther said the trip distributions indicated in his presentation indicate that about 5%
of vehicle trips from the apartment would be using Quentin Ave. About 15% of trips
associated with the grocery store would also use Quentin.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison asked about lighting on the building.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 28
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Mr. Tucci said internal lighting would come from the grocery store and apartment units.
No street lights will be added and no lighting on the building is currently proposed. He
said there may be a name put on the building which could be lit.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said residents were concerned about what the site would
look like during winter and spring months. She asked if the developer would do a study
on that and meet with the residents again.
Mr. Tucci said residents would see the building with some street level landscaping. He
said site line studies could be done, but the view would be as the elevations indicate.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the public hearing.
Commissioners received copies of e-mail correspondence from the following residents:
Janice Goldstein, 4730 Park Commons Dr., #313; Dan Steeves, 4034 Quentin Ave. S.;
Lyn Wik, 3965 Quentin Ave. S.; Matt Stangl; and Steven Katkov, 3904 Kipling Ave. S.
Four indicated concerns with the proposal and/or opposition to the proposal, and Mr.
Steeves’s email supported the application, but questioned the sustainability of another
grocery store.
Jim Beneke, 3934 Ottawa Ave. S., stated there were several signs that the development is
way too big. He said there were several tricks on the parking such as tandem parking and
shared parking. He said even with the tricks they were kind of iffy on parking spaces.
He said if it was developed according to high density residential zoning it would have
been restricted to 110 units. He said he doesn’t think it should even be taken as a starting
point for negotiations. Mr. Beneke stated he didn’t think it was a serious development
offer at all.
Robert Reinhardt, 4713 Vallacher Ave. S., said he overlooks the Bally’s site. He spoke
about ice, snow and water falling from overhangs. He said he is very concerned about
the height of the building. He said if Excelsior & Grand can make the numbers work with
four stories then the new proposal should be able to do so. Mr. Reinhardt said the trellis
adds another story. He added that he does see the Excelsior & Grand design element from
his house so he will see the six story design element on the proposed development. Mr.
Reinhardt stated that he hopes another developer can make a four story project work. He
asked if the traffic study was done during MEA week in October.
Catherine Kedzuf, 4755 Park Commons Dr., said her apartment overlooks the grassy
area. She said she frequently makes the left hand turn from Excelsior to Quentin. The
stop light is very lengthy. She said the Bally’s parking ramp is currently used, including
overnight parking. Parking occurs on Quentin on the Bally’s side by employees of the
Park Nicollet building. Ms. Kedzuf said on-street parking is not permitted on Princeton
during the winter overnight. Those units then park at Bally’s lot or the Excelsior & Grand
lot. When overnight parking is allowed parking occurs on both sides of the road. Ms.
Kedzuf said she hoped a traffic study would be conducted regarding safety and day-to-
day walkability for the neighborhood. She suggested double checking the on-street
designated parking especially during the winter months as well as double checking the
stacking numbers. Ms. Kedzuf said she questioned the entrance to the parking ramp on
the Quentin Ave. side and the impact that will have on people coming and going. She
suggested looking at parking spaces/unit. She said in her building most, but not all, of the
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 29
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
underground parking spaces are full and a number of residents utilize the public lot,
including overnight. Ms. Kedzuf recommended standards around construction noise and
traffic. She stated she is in favor of new development but feels further evaluation needs
to be done.
Carol Sandberg, 4820 Park Commons Dr., #29, said she is concerned about the width of
Quentin and Princeton Avenues. She asked if the development will use some of its
property as egress and ingress to their parking rather than using the two lanes on each
street. She stated that rush hour is actually from 7 – 9 a.m. and 4 – 6 p.m.
Mr. Walther said turn lanes on the side streets are not proposed.
Ms. Sandberg said she wondered if this small area can support another grocery in
addition to Byerly’s, Target, Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods, and Linden Hills Co-op. She
said she does not feel another grocery store is a viable and good use of the property. She
suggested that a clinic would be a good use.
Sharon Tilden, 4820 Park Commons Dr., #224, asked to see the slide illustrating the
slope. She said her building’s parking is underground. Drivers go down the slope and
cut in and go down further. She said the slope goes all the way down through her
building’s property and is not a gradual slope. She said to say the proposed building is a
five story building is not true. Residents in her building will be looking at a building
which looks to be six or seven stories. Ms. Tilden said drivers park in her building’s
parking spaces all the time to get to the park. She said she spoke with the developer at
the neighborhood meeting about more problems of people parking in her building’s lot.
She said the response was to have those cars towed. She said she was not happy with the
response.
Antonio Spargo, 4860 Park Commons Dr., #104, said looking at the corner of Park
Commons Dr. and Princeton it appears to be closer to seven stories than six on the back
side. The height is much taller than Excelsior & Grand. He said a lot of the current street
parking is by Park Nicollet employees and patients which was probably not accounted for
in the parking study. Mr. Spargo said he rides the Route 12 bus every day and currently
it does pull into a cut-out and pulls out of traffic to let people on and off. He said the
circulator often parks around the block and takes up two parking spots. Mr. Spargo said
parking needs to be considered in the whole study of this development.
Eleanore Merton, 4820 Park Commons Dr., said that six stories is two stories too many.
She said 189 units are too many rental apartments which could add up to 380 extra cars to
the mix, increasing traffic jams and pollution. Ms. Merton suggested a fabric store would
be a good addition to the area.
Nancy Bartsch, 3754 Inglewood Ave. S., said she is concerned about the height, density,
existing traffic at Traffic Joe’s and Excelsior & Grand to Monterey is already crazy, and
cut-through traffic through 38th St. to France. Ms. Bartsch said the cut-through traffic is
already unsafe.
Rita Wagner, 4820 Park Commons Dr., #135, said her main objection is pollution with all
the cars idling. She said she lives on the first floor on the north side of the building. The
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 30
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
proposed building will appear to be eight stories high from her side and it will block all
of her winter sun.
Denise Davis, 4820 Park Commons Dr., a 32-year resident, said she is surprised by the
number of units proposed for the Bally’s site, in addition to the proposed development
units on Monterey. She asked about studies on the effects of high density housing on
neighborhoods. She said she is concerned that Wolfe Park will no longer be a place of
peace and quiet. Ms. Davis stated she is concerned about traffic throughout the
development and Excelsior & Grand area.
Patti Carlson, 3801 Inglewood Ave. S., said she is concerned about the 38th St. cut-
through. She added that the Monterey intersection is currently problematic. She said her
main concern regards the possibility of another liquor store in the grocery store. She said
she thinks there are too many liquor stores in the area as it is. She listed Miracle Mile,
Trader Joe’s, Jennings and Byerly’s. She said Excelsior Blvd. used to be known as a
liquor place and she doesn’t think it is necessary to have another liquor store. Ms.
Carlson said the neighborhood doesn’t need the height of the proposed building.
Michelle Barry, 4524 W. 39th St., stated she is concerned about cut-through traffic on 39th
St. She said drivers go too fast and she has seen a lot of near accidents. Her area doesn’t
have stop signs. She stated other concerns regard the mix of affordable units, average
projected square footage per unit, price/square foot, all rental units, delivery, recycling
management, trash, loading dock size, landscaping of 10% of trees required, vines, and
loss of park view. Ms. Barry said she is concerned about building a canyon wall along
Excelsior Blvd. with Bally’s site proposed development, Excelsior & Grand, Ellipse, and
proposed development at Monterey. She said she does not think that is the character of
the city. She said she wanted everyone to think 20 years in the future when the south side
of Excelsior Blvd. starts to get developed. Ms. Barry said she was concerned about
another grocery store being the main tenant. She said snow removal is already an issue.
She said developers are continuing to push the limits of the original plan for the north
side of Excelsior Blvd.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison asked Mr. Walther to answer some of Ms. Barry’s
questions.
Mr. Walther said all apartments will be rental units. He said staff is also concerned
about the space provided for trash and recycling management. He stated that snow will
be required to be hauled off-site, similar to Excelsior & Grand. The developer would be
responsible for clearing out the parking bays.
The applicant, Paul Tucci, said the traffic study was done Tues., Oct. 14. MEA started at
the end of that week. He said in reference to the comment about towing at the condos,
Mr. Tucci said he believed he asked the resident if the management company did any
enforcement with towing. In regards to cut-through traffic he said the traffic distribution
(Figure A4) is mentioned in the traffic study. He said he would inform Bally’s that people
are parking at the site. He commented that if just Bally’s were to open at the current site,
Oppidan’s traffic engineer estimates that using the ITE trip generation formula for that
use at that location would generate 1,000 cars in/day and 1,000 cars out/day. Mr. Tucci
said liquor store numbers and proximity is a city licensing issue. He said affordable units
will be 1-bedroom and alcove units. Average square footage of 1-bedrooms will be about
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 31
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
700. Average square footage of 2-bedrooms will be about 1,050. Trash for residential is
inside the parking garage. The exterior trash area is for cardboard and trash area for
grocery store only. The 10% tree replacement will be made up with cash payment. He
said proposed spacing of trees is similar to Excelsior & Grand.
Mr. Tucci said Oppidan has done 35 grocery stores and detailed market analyses are very
accurate. He said the current RC and MX zoning allows six stories with the qualification
that five stories is more keeping in line with Trader Joe’s, Ellipse and E2. He stated that
Oppidan is trying to work within boundaries and setbacks to try to make a viable project.
He said that balconies do not hang over the sidewalk or easement area, with the exception
of 1 or 2 that may just catch the back corner of a sidewalk.
Mr. Walther said as shown currently on the plan the sidewalk is continuous from the
street curb to the building especially along Excelsior Blvd. There are three stacks of
decks that hang out from the building. There is a similar situation on the north side.
Erik Gerrits, 4904 Vallacher, said four stories were established for Excelsior & Grand.
Trader Joe building and Ellipse are five stories and the neighborhood would like to
actually stay with what the city started with which is four stories. Mr. Gerrits said he is
concerned with the turn onto Quentin. It is already a hard turn to make with angled
parking located there. There will be back-ups onto Excelsior. He commented there is not
enough room for the density proposed. He said he has concerns about a brand new
grocery store chain.
Sharon Tilden, 4820 Park Commons Dr., #224, said she wished to add to her earlier
comments that when she moved to the area they were told Excelsior & Grand would be
three stories. Then it became four stories. She said the newest proposal is for 5-6 stories
and the neighborhood is very upset about this.
As no one else was present wishing to speak, the Vice Chair closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson said the height does not bother him but the development feels
like it is a little too big all around. He said it is short on trees, short on parking, and a
variance requested to get closer. A 10 foot easement would allow more room for trees.
He said he likes the idea of the stairs coming out from the units along Princeton but they
are on the easement. If the building was pulled back just a little bit, a little bit smaller
and relaxed, then the stair amenity would fit. Commissioner Robertson said the
architecture is what is trendy today. He said he understands a developer’s need to
maximize. He said he would vote to approve the plat. He stated he was cautious about
the variance saying if the building was a bit smaller a variance wouldn’t be necessary.
He said the PUD is preliminary but there are issues to work on. He said he probably
would approve the PUD but by not approving the variance and with his other comments
he would hope the final comes back with improvements.
Mr. Walther reviewed the next steps of the new Planned Unit Development process.
After this public hearing the request will go forward to the City Council. If Council
approves the preliminary plat and PUD, the PUD does not come back to Planning
Commission.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 32
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Commissioner Carper said the traffic study seems to be reliable. Parking may be tight.
He commented that the city doesn’t choose the retail tenants. He said his primary
concern is the height of the building. He said the city wants to try to increase the amount
of affordable housing in the city. The only way for the developer to make that work is to
have more units.
Commissioner Tatalovich said he agreed with most of Commissioner Robertson’s
concerns. He said he is also concerned about height, traffic and landscaping. He added
there are too many questions. He said he would not be in favor of an overall motion.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said she shared the concerns of the other commissioners.
She said she is concerned about height, density and unanswered questions about the
project. She commented that staff has itemized those questions very well. She discussed
needing to ask the City Council about the Comprehensive Plan and why changes to
height are being proposed for this development. She said she understood why additional
units are being proposed to accommodate affordable housing. She stated all of those
things have to be taken back to the City Council for further study. She asked what could
be done by the Planning Commission at this meeting without recommending the project.
Commissioner Robertson said he would be willing to make a motion to approve the
preliminary plat, deny the variance and recommend denial of the PUD as it currently is
presented. He noted there are lots of recommendations by staff as well as
recommendations and comments by the Commission and before it goes to Council, and if
those things are changed, the Council can look at it at that point. He said he was okay
with denying and moving it forward as it currently is.
Commissioner Carper said he supported that idea.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Preliminary Plat
with the conditions stated in the staff report, denial of the Subdivision Variances, and
denial of the Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD). Commissioner Carper
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison asked when the request would go to the City Council.
Mr. Walther said the request is tentatively scheduled for City Council consideration on
May 18, but with requests for amending items, possible consideration of TIF financing,
and study sessions, that date could change. Staff will update the schedule on the City
website when it is known. A mailing with the new date will also go out.
4. Other Business
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
Submitted by Nancy Sells, Administrative Secretary
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 33
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
!" !#
$
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
" #
$ % &
' ()*+)
, ')-)+.(
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 34
!"
#$%
&
!'
$
()
#*+
!
'
, -./0
!'
1
! '
%0..
,$% 23 !!
$
0 !!$
!
! '
,
4
!
,
./0
!
! '
$
//
()
!
5
%
!
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 35
!"
# " $ %
$$ #
&
'
$$ (
(
$$ " )
)
*% " +
," - .
+ .
/" 0 % * 1
" $
2
3 &
/" 0 .) " $
2
3 )
/" # 0 ! "
$$ 4" ,
/" & 0
*% -5
6
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 36
!"
#$%
&
! (
%
!'
$
()
#*+
!
'
5!
%
!
'
4
1
! 6
$
!
! +
4
!
! +, $
!
! 7
%!
'
1
!
!
#
! #$(
+ #
! #$(
+ 89
! :
! #$(
+ ;
! #
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 37
.
!"
'
<=(
=,> !"
#$%&
!'
$#$(
+
%
,
%#
<
6
>!
'
'
6
!
'
!'
!5
#$(
+ ,
$! '
%
,
#
%, $
8
$!'
$
,
$
#$(
+ %4
!
,6 .
!
'
$
00
!'
$
.3
! '
$
//
!
6
%
./?!'
./0%
!
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 38
# " $ %
$$
!"#
=(
=,!@
, ,
! '
?
!
&
+
'
<&+5'>
%
./%?//
!
%#
%#$(
+ ,
!'
/!
.%//
&+5'
!'
%
,
,
!
'
,
!'
#
,
8
!'
,
,
,
,
!
,
6
!
$
@
,
,$
5
./3!*
%
$
,
!'!!$
,
21/
1/!!'!!$
,
?1//
01//!!'!!$
#$(
+
,
31//
?1//!!
#
313?
?13?!! !
'
!
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 39
3
1(
A
%(
,
!@
B"
C
$
%
%
! "
<"5 >
, <
,
> , "
6 <"5 6>
, <
>! "5 +
', (
!
@
"5
!
5
"5 6 ,
"5 +! '
"5
<
A
%(>!'
"5
%
!
' "5
,' !'
,
6 !'
,
"5
!'"5
,
,
D@ '75'&
,!
,
!
'
"5
% ,
% ! '
"5 (
,
"5 +
!
/" 0 % * 1
" $
2
3
7 * 7 *
8 (<> (<>
8#
<> <>
#$(
+8#
<> <>
#$(
+8 <> <>
'
"
!'
<
>
"
,
!
8 9 /"
! 8 /"
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 40
?
&
'
$$
%
,
! "
#
!
!
$
8
,
%
,
$
! "
$
!
!
! '
1
%
%
!
2
/
!!$
!
3
!!$
!
@
,
,
!' %
,
,
%
,
!'
8
!
'
,
!'
,
$
%'
,
,!!!!
$
!@ %
</E>
!
9
<?E>% #$ (
+ </E>%
</E>!'
6 3!
'
,
,
!
&
%
./0% $
,
,
!'
,
,
!'&+5'
./
,
4
=(
/!'
./
,%&+5'
4
, /E
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 41
0
! *
, %
,
/!?
! '
%
,<
,
>,
,
$!
'
,
./0 ;
!';
,
,
! '
;
!'
./0 $
,
!
(
$$ "
'
'"5
./0;
,' .!'
,
./0
!'
,
,
,
!'
! '
./0 $
, ,
"5
!'"5
,
,.//
D@ '75'&
,!'
"5
% ,
% !
/" 0 .) " $
2
3
7 * 1
7 * 1
:" " :" "
8 (<> (<> (<> (<>
8#
<> <> <> <>
#$(
+8#
<> <> <> <>
#$(
+8 <> <> <> <>
8
8 <> 8 <>
#$(
+8
8 <> 8 <>
#
8
8 <> 8 <>
'
"
!'
<
>
"
,
!
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 42
2
' .
,
, ;
%
,
!'
"5 ,
,
8
, 4
"5 ./0!!$
!'
,
9?
!@
%
,
!@
,
!7%
!
;
!
'
,
&+5'
!'
,
./0
;
,' !'
,
!'
'
,
4
!
/" # 0 ! "
$$ 4"
-
%
%
; % .)
:"
4" <<< .) "
:
.2%.//F
.%///./%?//GG.%??/ %??/ .%//
;
%?//F
/%///.%//G .%.?/ .%?/ 3%0//
%?//F
/%///%?/G .%/// 3?/ .%3?/
D
7
;
?/
H
(
("
!"
#$(
#
G.//9 + 'D
1&+5''&
GG./ + 'D
1&+5''&
GGG;
!&
, $
%
4
,
!
%#$(
+ #
&+5'
,
!
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 43
%
$
!
'
.//
%?/
#$(
+ %
!'
0?/
2?/
#
! '
, ,
,
!
)
*% "
!
%$
,
!'
$
00
!'
$
.3
!'
$
//
!
( )
!"
#$
$
!6
%
!6
%
.?/
?/
!'(
,
$
,4
4
$! ' 3
,
$
(
! '
$
$
!
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 44
9
/" & 0
*% -5
9
=7
*%
7
*%
I
8"
.0
?2.
.9%2 6
.0
3
9
.0
3
99
'
?9 39
7
'
5
</E>
?3?
0
.2
33
.
>
"
6)
#,&
./
.? $!&
4
!
%
!
$
,
!
&
"
'!
!'
1
.
$
,$%.? %.3/ !
?
/
$
,$!
'
$
,
$ ,
!
%
$,
$!
'
?
$
/
$!=
, %
%
,
!
,
?
$
.
%,
$ 4
$!
@
,
%
$ ,
,
!
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 45
/
, " -
'$
, - ./0
! '
1
! '
%0..
,$% 23 !!$
!!$
!
! '
,
4
!
,
./0
!
! '
// $
()
!
5
%
!
+
'%
*&+
, -
" "
"
' ,!
&
#&
&./0;
#&./0;
&./0
#&./0
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 46
1Traffic Impact Study A Excelsior Blvd Mixed-Use
Appendix A - Figures
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 47
2Traffic Impact Study A Excelsior Blvd Mixed-UseAppendix A - FiguresCity Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 48
3Traffic Impact Study A Excelsior Blvd Mixed-Use
Appendix A - Figures
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 49
! " ! #"
! " ! #" 4Traffic Impact Study A Excelsior Blvd Mixed-UseAppendix A - FiguresCity Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 50
Daily VolumesDAILYENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBYRATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXITApartment220 1,000 GFA 183.0 6.65 50% 50% 15% 183 0%0 517 517Grocery Store850 1,000 GFA 29.8 102.24 50% 50% 15% 457 0%0 1,294 1,294TOTALS6390 1,811 1,811AM Peak HourAM ENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBYRATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXITApartment220 1,000 GFA 183.0 0.51 20% 80% 11% 10 0%014 70Grocery Store850 1,000 GFA 29.8 3.40 62% 38% 11% 11 0%057 33TOTALS21071 103PM Peak HourPM ENTER EXIT INTERNAL INTERNAL PASSBY PASSBYRATE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TRIPS PERCENT TRIPS ENTER EXITApartment220 1,000 GFA 183.0 0.62 65% 35% 15% 17 0%065 31Grocery Store850 1,000 GFA 29.8 9.48 51% 49% 15% 42 0%0 123 117TOTALS590 188 148NOTES:1. GFA = Gross Floor Area2. All trip generation rates based on "Trip Generation", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 9th Edition unless otherwise noted.3. Reduction for internal trips (Internal Percent) is based on "Trip Generation Handbook", Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2nd Edition.4. No reduction made for passby trips due to the location of the site accesses. Most passbys will likely be from Excelsior Blvd, so they are just treated as new trips.5. A.M. Trip Generation is for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic (one hour between 7 and 9 a.m.).6. P.M. Trip Generation is for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic (one hour between 4 and 6 p.m.).NEW TRIPSLAND USEITECODE #DEVELOPMENTUNITS (GFA)QUANTITYNEW TRIPSLAND USEITECODE #DEVELOPMENTUNITS (GFA)QUANTITYNEW TRIPSLAND USEITECODE #DEVELOPMENTUNITS (GFA)QUANTITYTable B1Forecast Trip GenerationAppendix B - Trip Generation TableTraffic Impact StudyB1Excelsior Blvd Mixed-UseCity Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 51
April 3, 2015
Mr. Sean Walther
Senior Planner
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
5005 Minnetonka Blvd.
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Re: 4900 Excelsior Boulevard – St. Louis Park, MN
Shared Parking Analysis
Walker Project # 21-4092.00
Dear Mr. Walther,
Walker Parking Consultants (“Walker”) is pleased to submit the findings that resulted from the
Shared Parking Analysis prepared for the 4900 Excelsior Boulevard mixed-use Development
(the “Development”) in St. Louis Park, Minnesota.
INTRODUCTION
The proposed Development will reside on the former site of Bally Total Fitness on the north
side of Excelsior Boulevard. The site is bound by Quentin Avenue S on the west, Park
Commons Drive on the north and Princeton Avenue on the east.
Three vehicular access points are planned, with resident parking access proposed on the
north off Park Commons Drive and access for grocery store and resident guest parking
planned off Quentin Avenue on the west and off Princeton Avenue on the east. Additionally,
there is a bus stop located on the southwest corner of the Development that serves patrons
traveling eastbound, as well as a second bus stop on the northeast corner of Excelsior
Boulevard and Quentin Avenue S that serves customers traveling westbound.
The City of St. Louis Park (the “City”) engaged Walker to assist them to determine the number
of parking spaces needed to serve the Development, assuming the effects of the Urban
Land Institute’s (ULI) Shared Parking1. An aerial view of the proposed site is shown on the
following page in (Figure 1).
1 Shared Parking, second edition, ULI-Urban Land Institute and the International Council of Shopping Centers, Mary Smith, 2005
1660 South Highway 100
Suite 424
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 952.595.9116
Fax: 952.595.9516
www.walkerparking.com
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 52
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 2
Figure 1: 4900 Excelsior Boulevard – Proposed Development Site
Source: Bing Maps
LAND USES
Based upon Walker’s discussion with the City, at full build-out the Development will contain
183 residential units, a 28,200 ± square foot specialty grocery store and possibly a liquor store.
We utilized this information to develop a Shared Parking demand model that depicts the
approximate parking supply of spaces needed to accommodate the projected peak-hour
parking demand for the site.
PARKING SUPPLY
The inset table details the parking supply proposed
by Oppidan Investment Company (the
“Developer”), to accommodate the anticipated
peak-hour parking demand generated by the
Development. In total, 339 spaces are planned; 33
on street, 66 in a surface lot adjacent to the site,
and 240 in a below-grade parking structure.
Location Supply
On-Street 33
Surface Lot 66
P1 172
P2 45
Tandem 23
Total Supply 339
Parking Supply (projected)
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 53
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 3
ZONING CODE REQUIREMENT
Historically, city planners calculate parking demand for each land use as a stand-alone
entity; assuming that each use requires an independent supply of spaces. This action
typically guarantees code requirements that result in a parking surplus.
In reality and contrary to the estimated code requirement, fluctuating patterns of demand
typically allow different land uses to share some or all of the same parking spaces; thereby,
reducing the total supply needed to support development. Moreover, the more the
individual utilization patterns of land uses differ from each other, the more complimentary
they are to sharing the available parking supply. For example, office and hotel components
are complimentary, as they experience peak demand periods at different times of the day,
on different days of the week.
A comparison of the zoning code requirement, as calculated by Walker, to the weekday
(398 ± spaces) and weekend day (400 ± spaces) unadjusted parking demand calculation
established using the Shared Parking methodology is included below in Table 1.
Pursuant to the City code, the grocery/liquor store will require one (1) space per 250 gross
square feet and the residential component will require one (1) space per bedroom.
Furthermore, the code allows a transit reduction of 10% for commercial uses that are located
within one-quarter mile of a transit stop. The code also allows the on street spaces
immediately adjacent to the site to count toward the minimum parking supply on a one to
one basis, as well as for a reduction for Shared Parking, if supporting data is provided.
Walker’s estimate of the code requirement for the Development, assuming a transit
reduction, is 348 ± spaces as shown below.
Table 1: Unadjusted Parking Demand/ St. Louis Park Zoning Code (estimated)
Source: St. Louis Park Zoning Code, Walker Parking Consultants (estimated)
Land Use Unit 2 Base Ratio Unit Demand Base Ratio Units Demand Base Ratio Units Demand
Specialty Grocery 28,228 3.50 /ksf GLA 99 3.70 /ksf GLA 104 4.00 /ksf GLA 113
Employee 0.60 17 0.50 14
Residential Guests 189 0.10 /unit 19 0.10 /unit 19
Studio/Efficiency 4 1.00 /unit 4 1.00 /unit 4 1.00 /eff unit 4
1 bedroom 128 1.40 /unit 179 1.40 0.00 179 1.00 /1br unit 128
2 bedroom 57 1.40 /unit 80 1.40 0.00 80 2.00 /2 br unit 114
Subtotal Customer/Guest 118 123
Subtotal Employee/Resident 280 277
SUB TOTAL 359
less Transit allowance (10% of commercial)(11)
TOTAL 398 400 348
Notes:
1 Unadjusted demand per Shared Parking.
2 Unit of measure; square feet for grocery, number of units for residential component.
Weekdays 1 Weekends 1 Local Zoning Rquirement
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 54
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 4
PARKING DEMAND RATIOS
The base parking demand ratios used in Urban Land Institute’s Shared Parking were
developed by observing hourly accumulations of vehicles around standalone land-uses
during the course of a typical year (365 consecutive days) and identifying design conditions
for weekdays as well as for a weekend day. At the peak-hour of the year a comparison was
made between the total number of cars parked and a designated key unit of measure
specific to each land-use (e.g. square footage for many land-uses, rooms for hotels or
bedrooms per residence). Additionally, some ratios were supplemented through added
fieldwork.
Due to the mixed-use nature of the proposed Development, as well as potential variations
in operating hours and peak parking demand times associated with the proposed
grocery/liquor store, a Shared Parking analysis should prove beneficial in assessing the
projected peak-hour parking demand for the site.
Given the above, to prepare this analysis we utilized the mixed use parking standards
established in Shared Parking to project the approximate peak-hour parking demand;
moreover, we applied both month and time of day adjustments for each land use to the
individual parking ratios. The ratios used for analysis are shown in the following table.
Table 2: Base Parking Demand Ratios
Source: Walker Parking Consultants
We used the base ratios shown above and considered the following three factors when
developing the Shared Parking model:
1) Non-captive Ratio. Non-captive ratios are typically expressed as a percentage of
users who create no incremental parking demand when visiting more than one land
use on the same trip (e.g. an office employee that walks to a retailer to shop or eat
lunch or a resident shopping at the grocery store). Overall, the effect of the captive
market can be significant, and the use of non-captive factors ensures that patrons
are not counted twice in the overall estimated parking demand. The non-captive
ratios assumed for this analysis assume that 3% of the residents are captive with regard
to using the specialty grocery/liquor store. This assumption is based on observations
and shared use studies compiled over time at other mixed-use Developments
throughout North America.
Land Use Visitor Emp./User Visitor Emp./User Unit Source Weekday Weekend
Specialty Grocery 3.50 0.60 3.70 0.50 /ksf GLA 5 4.10 4.20
Residential : Studio 0.10 1.00 0.15 1.00 /unit 4 1.10 1.15
Residential: 1 Bedroom 0.10 1.40 0.10 1.40 /unit 4 1.50 1.50
Residential: 2 Bedroom 0.10 1.40 0.10 1.40 /unit 4 1.50 1.50
Source:
4. Recommended Zoning Ordinance Provisions for Parking Washington DC: National Parking Association
5. Field study of Whole Foods (8 locations), Trader Joes (4 locations) and Wild Oats (2 locations).
Weekday Weekend Total
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 55
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 5
2) Presence Factor - Presence is expressed as a
percentage of the peak potential demand
modified for time of day and month of year, which
can have a significant effect on demand at a
mixed-use Development. For example, a 10,000 sf
retail store has a peak demand of about 36 spaces
on a weekday and 40 spaces on a weekend day
during the peak-hour (11:00 AM); while the same
store is unlikely to project any parking demand at
11:00 PM.
3) Driving Ratio - Driving ratio represents the percentage of users arriving at the site by
means other than a personal vehicle. According to the U.S. Census “Journey to Work”
statistics shown in the inset table, about eighty-seven percent (87%) of the St. Louis
Park residents drive to work.
Typically, adjustments made to the driving ratio mirror the “Journey to Work” statistics for the
demographic area. However, if the proposed land-use(s) are service oriented, similar to the
grocery/liquor store proposed for the Development, an additional adjustment of -5% is
applied to the driving ratio. This assumes that service employees are more likely to utilize
public transportation or carpool to work rather than drive; which differs from office workers
that may require the higher drive ratio represented in the Journey to Work statistics. The
various adjustments made to the base parking demand ratios, in an effort to render project
specific projections, are shown in the following table.
Table 3: Adjustments to Base Ratios for Driving and Captive Users
Source: Walker Parking Consultants
Using the land-use data provided by the City, Walker developed the Shared Parking model
detailed in the next section, which projects the approximate number of spaces needed to
provide adequate parking on weekdays and weekend days during peak-hour demand
conditions.
Drive to Work
Drive Alone 78.5%
Carpool 8.7%
Sub-Total - Drive 87.2%
Other Means
Public Transportation 6.1%
Taxi 0.3%
Bicycle 0.4%
Walk 2.0%
Work at Home 4.0%
Sub Total - Other 12.8%
Total 100.0%
Journey to Work - St. Louis Park, MN
Land Use Quantity Unit Daytime Evening Daytime Evening Daytime Evening Daytime Evening
Specialty Grocery 28,228 GLA 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 97% 97% 97%
Employee 82% 82% 82% 82% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Studio/Efficiency 4 units 97% 97% 97% 97% 100% 100% 100% 100%
1 bedroom 128 units 97% 97% 97% 97% 100% 100% 100% 100%
2 bedroom 57 units 97% 97% 97% 97% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Driving Ratio
Weekday Weekend
Non Captive Ratio
Weekday Weekend
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 56
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 6
SHARED PARKING
Walker has conducted numerous studies and consulted with leading organizations such as
the Institute of Transportation Engineers, ULI and the International Council of Shopping
Centers to determine appropriate parking demand ratios for use when developing Shared
Parking models.
Parking demand is influenced by the time of year, such as when the volume of patronage
for a retail establishment peaks during the holiday season and decreases rapidly thereafter.
Retailers typically report peak annual activity for the two weeks prior to Christmas, and during
this time parking demand may equal 100 percent of the peak projections for a particular
site. Inversely, office demand often decreases during the same period, as employees are
often absent or away on vacation. These variations by time of day and time of year were
assumed for this analysis and applied to our Shared Parking model.
Finally, parking demand is a fluid force, subject to variations according to the availability of
alternative transportation, proximity of complimentary land uses, differences in user
presence by time of day and time of year, building occupancy rates and a host of other
factors. Conversely, the available parking supply tends to be a fixed quantity, limited by the
amount of space that can be allocated on a given site for parking.
Assuming the effects of Shared Parking, the projected weekday peak-hour parking demand
for the Development is 331 ± spaces, on the busiest weekday annually. The peak-hour
demand, which is projected to occur in May at 5:00 PM, is calculated based upon the driving
and non-captive ratios as well as the presence factors (peak-hour adjustments) shown in the
following table. As depicted, the projected peak-hour weekday demand represents a 17%
or 67 space reduction from the unadjusted weekday parking demand projected for the site.
Table 4: Peak-Hour Demand – Weekday (projected)
Source: Walker Parking Consultants
Weekday Unadjusted Adjustment Pk Hr Adj Non Captive Drive Ratio May May
Land Use Demand May 5:00 PM Daytime Daytime 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
Specialty Grocery 99 100%97%97% 100%93 72
Employee 17 100%90% 100% 82%13 11
Residential Guests 19 100%40% 100% 100%8 11
Residential Unreserved 263 100%85% 100% 97%217 230
Subtotal Customer/Guest 118 101 83
Subtotal Employee/Resident 280 230 241
Total Parking Spaces Required 398 331 324
% reduction 17%
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 57
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 7
In addition to the weekday peak-hour parking demand, the projected weekday demand
by time of day (twelve-hour period from 9:00 AM until 9:00 PM), is shown graphically below
in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Parking Demand by Time of Day – Weekdays (projected)
Source: Walker Parking Consultants
Assuming the effects of Shared Parking, the projected weekend day peak-hour parking
demand for the Development is 312 ± spaces; on the busiest weekend day annually. The
peak-hour demand, which is also projected to occur in May at 5:00 PM, is calculated using
the driving and non-captive ratios and presence factors (peak-hour adjustments) shown in
Table 5 on the following table. As shown, the projected peak-hour weekend day demand
represents a 22% or 88 space reduction from the unadjusted weekend day parking demand
projection.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 58
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 8
Table 5: Peak-Hour Demand – Weekend Day (projected)
Source: Walker Parking Consultants
VARIANCE TO LOCAL ZONING CODE
When the projected peak-hour parking demand
(weekday in May at 5:00 PM) is compared to
Walker’s estimated zoning code requirement, a
negative variance of 28 ± spaces exists, as shown in
the inset table.
PARKING ADEQUACY
The term “Parking Adequacy” is defined as the ability
of the parking supply to accommodate the Design
Day peak-hour parking demand. A positive or
negative remainder when compared to the
proposed parking supply indicates a parking surplus
or deficit within the system, structure or lot.
Based on our analysis, when the proposed parking supply (339 spaces) is compared to the
peak-hour parking demand projection (331 ± spaces), a positive surplus of 8 ± spaces will
exist. Therefore, the parking supply proposed for the Development should adequately
accommodate the peak-hour parking demand projection, as shown in the inset table.
User Group Existing
Customer/Guest, All Uses 101
Employee, All Uses 230
Parking Demand (projected)331
Supply 339
Surplus/(Deficit)8
Parking Adequacy (projected)
Weekend Unadjusted Adjustment Pk Hr Adj Non Captive Drive Ratio May May
Land Use Demand May 5:00 PM Daytime Daytime 5:00 PM 7:00 PM
Specialty Grocery 104 100% 80%97% 100%81 34
Grocery Employees 14 100% 55% 100% 82%6 5
Residential Guests 19 100% 40% 100% 100%8 19
Residential 263 100% 85% 100% 97%217 244
Subtotal Customer/Guest 123 89 53
Subtotal Employee/Resident 277 223 249
Total Parking Spaces Required 400 312 302
% reduction 22%
Sub-Total Zoning Code Requirement 359
(less) Transit Rqeduction of 10%(11)
Total - Zoning Code Requirement 348
Shared Parking Peak-Hour 331
Surplus/(Deficit) Code vs. Shared Parking (28)
Variance to Zoning Code
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 59
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 9
CONCLUSION
Based upon Walker’s analysis of the land use data provided by the City, and the Shared
Parking model prepared for the 4900 Excelsior Boulevard mixed-use Development, the
following summarizes the results of our analysis.
o The projected weekday peak-hour parking demand is 331 ± spaces, on the busiest
weekday annually. This calculation is based upon the drive ratios, non-captive ratios
and peak-hour adjustments discussed throughout our report.
o When the projected peak-hour parking demand (331 ± spaces) is compared to
Walker’s estimate of the zoning code requirement (348 ±), a variance of 28 ± fewer
spaces is projected.
o When the proposed parking supply (339 spaces) is compared to the peak-hour
parking demand projection (331 ± spaces), a surplus of 8 ± spaces will exist.
o The parking supply proposed for the Development should adequately
accommodate the peak-hour parking demand projection.
In closing, we hope the enclosed analysis satisfies the scope of work anticipated for the 4900
Excelsior Boulevard engagement. Please call me at your convenience with any questions
or comments regarding the material provided for review.
Respectfully submitted,
Phill Schragal
Director of Operations Consulting
cc: Carl Schneeman – Walker Parking Consultants
C:\Users\schragal\Desktop\St Louis Park\Report\(1.0) Draft 4900 Excelsior_Shared Parking Analysis_040315.docx
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 60
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 10
SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. Meet with the City’s representative via teleconference to clarify study objectives,
define project parameters and review the proposed deliverable product and
schedule.
B. Obtain from the City’s representative detailed information regarding the land use
programming (i.e. square footage, type, etc.) All land use data should be provided
in square feet for retail entities, rooms for hotel Development and units (i.e. one-
bedroom, two-bedrooms and three-bedroom units, etc.) for residential components.
C. Discuss with the City’s representative anticipated peak patronage, visitation or
occupancy periods.
D. Prepare a Shared Parking Analysis employing the mixed use parking standards
established in Urban Land Institute’s Shared Parking to project the approximate
parking demand for the site.
E. In preparing the analysis, we will apply both month and time of day adjustments for
each land use to individual parking ratios to determine the approximate shared
parking demand for the Development site.
F. Summarize Walker’s findings in a draft letter report and submit to the City
representative for review and comment.
G. Obtain review comments from the City’s representative regarding the draft report.
H. Incorporate draft report comments into a final report and submit to the City’s
representative.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 61
Mr. Sean Walther
April 3, 2015
Page 11
STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS
1. This report is to be used in whole and not in part.
2. Walker’s report and recommendations are based on certain assumptions pertaining
to the future performance of the local economy and other factors typically related
to individual user characteristics that are either outside Walker’s control or that of the
client. To the best of Walker’s ability we analyzed available information that was
incorporated in projecting future performance of the proposed subject site.
3. Sketches, photographs, maps and other exhibits are included to assist the reader in
visualizing the property. It is assumed that the use of the land and improvements is
within the boundaries of the property described, and that there is no encroachment
or trespass unless noted.
4. All information, estimates, and opinions obtained from parties not employed by
Walker Parking Consultants are assumed to be true and correct. We assume no
liability resulting from misinformation.
5. None of this material may be reproduced in any form without our written permission,
and the report cannot be disseminated to the public through advertising, public
relations, news, sales, or other media.
6. We take no responsibility for any events or circumstances that take place subsequent
to the date of our field inspections.
7. We do not warrant that the projections will be attained, but they have been prepared
on the basis of information obtained during the course of this study and are intended
to reflect the expectations of a typical parking patron.
8. The numeric figures presented in this report were generated using computer models
that make calculations based on numbers carried out to three decimal places. In
the interest of simplicity, most numbers have been rounded to the nearest thousand;
therefore, these figures may be subject to small rounding errors.
9. This report was prepared by Walker Parking Consultants, and all opinions,
recommendations, and conclusions expressed during the course of this assignment
are rendered by the staff of Walker Parking Consultants as employees, rather than as
individuals.
10. The conclusions and recommendations presented were reached based on Walker’s
analysis of the information obtained from the client and our own sources. Information
furnished by others, upon which portions of this study may be predicated, is believed
to be reliable; however, it has not been verified in all cases.
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 62
4900 ExcElsior BoulEvard
City CounCil SeSSion - 4/27/2015
AERIAL VIEW SHOWING PROJECT VICINITY AND NEIGHBORING BUILDINGS
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 63
4900 ExcElsior BoulEvard
City CounCil SeSSion - 5/14/2015
PROPOSED BUILDING AT THE CORNER EXCELSIOR AND QUENTIN - VIEW TO NORTH
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 64
4900 ExcElsior BoulEvard
City CounCil SeSSion - 5/14/2015
PROPOSED BUILDING AT THE CORNER PRINCETON AND PARK COMMONS - VIEW TO SOUTH
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 65
4900 ExcElsior BoulEvard
LANDSCAPED STEEL STAIRS AND PERFORATED METAL SCREEN - 5/6/2015
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 66
4900 ExcElsior BoulEvard
LANDSCAPED STEEL STAIRS AND PERFORATED METAL SCREEN - 5/6/2015
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 67
4900 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD 05/14/2015City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 68
4900 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD 05/14/2015City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 69
PARK COMMONS DRIVE
PRINCETON AVE SOUTHEXCELSIOR BLVDQUENTIN AVEFIRE PIT AND
GRILL AREA
GREENROOF
(TYP)
SPA
OVERSTORY
TREES
(TYP)
UNDERSTORY
TREES (TYP)
CABANAS
FITNESS
CLUB
POOL
YOGA
BOCCE
DOG
RUN
LEASING COMMON/
SUPPORT
RAISED DECK
4900 EXCELSIOR
St. Louis Park, MN
May 2015 10’ 20’0
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 70
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 71
4900 EXCELSIOR
FOR PERMIT
Know wh at's
R NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONST. LOUIS PARK
SITE DATA SUMMARY
ZONING REZONE TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
EXISTING SITE AREA 2.00 ACRES
ROW DEDICATION 0.41 ACRES
PROPOSED SITE AREA 1.59 ACRES
PRE-DEVELOPMENT PERVIOUS AREA 0.69 ACRES
PRE-DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS AREA 0.90 ACRES
POST-DEVELOPMENT PERVIOUS AREA 0.05 ACRES
POST-DEVELOPMENT IMPERVIOUS AREA 1.54 ACRES
PRELIMINARYPLATPP2
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 72
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 73
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 74
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d)
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 75
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 76
RAIN SENSORS TO BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE IRRIGATION DESIGN.COORDINATE IRRIGATION SLEEVING LOCATIONS WITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR.SHRUB & PERENNIAL BEDS TO BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP IRRIGATION. SOD TO BE IRRIGATED WITH SPRAY.LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH A WATERING/LAWN IRRIGATION SCHEDULEAPPROPRIATE TO THE PROJECT SITE CONDITIONS AND TO PLANT MATERIALS GROWTH REQUIREMENTS.LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSURE THAT SOIL CONDITIONS AND COMPACTION ARE ADEQUATE TO ALLOW FORPROPER DRAINAGE AROUND THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. UNDESIRABLE CONDITIONS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THEATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO BEGINNING OF WORK. IT SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPECONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO INSURE PROPER SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE IN ALL PLANTING AREAS.LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING A PERFORMANCE IRRIGATION PLAN ANDSPECIFICATIONS AS PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK WHEN BIDDING. THESE SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPEARCHITECT PRIOR TO ORDER AND/OR INSTALLATION. IT SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITYTO INSURE THAT SODDED/SEEDED AND PLANTED AREAS ARE IRRIGATED PROPERLY, INCLUDING THOSE AREASDIRECTLY AROUND AND ABUTTING BUILDING FOUNDATION.IRRIGATION LIMITS TO EXTEND TO STREET BACK OF CURB.WEE TREE WALL SHALL BE CONNECTED TO IRRIGATION SYSTEM. COORDINATE WALL IRRIGATION WITH WEETREE WALL DESIGNER.COORDINATE LOCATION OF WATER SUPPLY AND CONTROLLER WITH MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS.City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 77
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 78
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 79
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 80
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 81
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 82
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 83
City Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 84
4900 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD SHADOW STUDY 04/09/2015May/ August 21stSeptember/ March 21stNovember /January 219AM11AM 1 PM3 PMCity Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 85
4900 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD SHADOW STUDY 04/09/2015November 22nd / January 20th - 9amNovember 22nd / January 20th - 10 amNovember 22nd / January 20th - 11 amNovember 22nd / January 20th - 1 pmNovember 22nd / January 20th - 2 pmNovember 22nd / January 20th - 12 pmNovember 22nd / January 20th - 3 pmCity Council Meeting of May 18, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 86
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 18, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: First Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Pertaining to Discontinuance of
Water Service
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance amending
Chapter 32, Sec. 32-35 and Sec. 32-39 of the St. Louis Park City Code pertaining to the
Discontinuance of Water Service, and to set the second reading for June 1, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to amend the City Code to allow
the City to discontinue water service if the property owner will not allow access to the property
to perform inspection, testing, repair or replacement of the water meter and related equipment,
provided the owner has been given a reasonable time to hire an independent, licensed contractor?
SUMMARY: Staff is requesting an amendment to the City Code to amend Section 32-35:
Discontinuance of service for ordinance violations and Section 32-39: Water meter inspection
and repairs to allow the City to discontinue water service to a property for failure to allow
access to the property’s water meter or related equipment. Prior to discontinuance of water
service, the property owner would be given a reasonable amount of time to hire an independent
licensed contractor to replace the water meter and/or related equipment and provide proof of
completion to the city. Since the service would otherwise have been provided at no cost to the
property owner, all costs associated with the independent repair of the meter and/or related
equipment would be the responsibility of the property owner.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
Existing Ordinance: From time to time, City staff must gain access to the water meter to
maintain the property’s water service in good working order. This service is provided at no cost
to the property owner. The current ordinance language does not expressly require the property
owner to provide access under the above conditions.
Proposed Ordinance: Staff is requesting an amendment to the ordinance to provide staff the
authority to discontinue water service if the property owner does not allow the necessary access
and does not hire an independent contractor to complete the work. City Attorney, Tom Scott,
has reviewed this proposed ordinance change.
NEXT STEPS: If the first reading is approved, then the City Code Amendment will be
scheduled for the June 1, 2015 City Council meeting for a second reading.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft of Proposed Ordinance
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) Page 2
Title: First Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Pertaining to Discontinuance of Water Service
ORDINANCE NO. 15-____
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO DISCONTINUANCE
OF WATER SERVICE, AMENDING CHAPTER 32
OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Section 32-35 of the City Code is amended to add the following
subsection:
(6) The owner or occupant will not allow access to the property by the city or its
agent for inspection, testings, repair or replacement of water meters and related
equipment, provided that the owner or occupant shall first be given a reasonable time
prior to the shutoff to hire a licensed contractor to perform the necessary work and
provide proof of completion to the city.
SECTION 2. Section 32-39 shall be amended to read as follows:
Sec. 32-39. Water meter inspection and repairs.
The city shall provide for inspection, testings, repair and replacement of all water
meters connected with the city water supply system at reasonable times.
SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its passage and
publication.
ADOPTED this ______ day of _______________, 2015, by the City Council of the City
of St. Louis Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council June 1, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney