HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015/09/08 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
SEPTEMBER 8, 2015
(Councilmember Sanger Out)
6:30 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Item
1. 30 min. 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
2. 25 min. Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
Written Reports
3. Update on Connect the Park! - 2015 Bikeways
4. Arlington Row Apartments West Update
5. SWLRT Update
6. The Shoreham Alley Vacation
7:25 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes August 17, 2015
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
6. Old Business – None
7. New Business
7a. 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification and Budget Adoption
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the proposed levy of a
special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, and
approval of the 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy and Budget for fiscal year 2016.
8. Communications -- None
9. Adjournment
Meeting of September 8, 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. Presentation Accepting a Donation from the American Legion to the Fire Department
2b. 2015 Evergreen Awards
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes August 10, 2015
3b. Special City Council Meeting Minutes August 13, 2015
3c. Special Study Session Meeting Minutes August 17, 2015
3d. Special City Council Meeting Minutes August 24, 2015
3e. Study Session Meeting Minutes August 24, 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 -- None
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public -- None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution Authorizing the 2016 Preliminary
HRA Levy.
8b. Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) to export approximately 7,000 cubic yards of material, subject to
conditions recommended by staff.
8c. Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Comprehensive Plan
amendment from BP – Business Park to MX – Mixed Use for 4601 Highway 7, 4725
Highway 7, and 3130 Monterey Avenue, and authorize publication of resolution
summary.
Meeting of September 8, 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.
8d. First Reading of Ordinance Extending CenterPoint Energy (CPE) Franchise Ordinance
Recommended Action: Motion to Approve First Reading regarding an Ordinance
amending St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2236-03 extending the term of the
Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco Franchise, and set the 2nd reading for September 21,
2015.
8e. First Reading of Ordinance Extending Xcel Energy Franchise Ordinance
Recommended Action: Motion to Approve First Reading regarding an Ordinance
amending St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2086-97 extending the term of the Xcel
Energy Franchise, and set the 2nd reading for September 21, 2015.
8f. 4900 Excelsior - Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Recommended Action:
• Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary PUD for properties at 4760
and 4900 Excelsior Blvd, subject to conditions.
• Motion granting an extension until November 18, 2015 to submit the Park Commons
West Final Plat.
9. Communications -- None
Meeting of September 8, 2015
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the period of July 25, 2015 through
August 28, 2015.
4b. Approve the second reading of an ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code
Chapter 3 relating to alcoholic beverages and to approve the summary ordinance for
publication.
4c. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Job’s Daughters
Foundation of Minnesota for an event to be held on October 17, 2015, at the Paul
Revere Masonic Center, 6509 Walker Street in St. Louis Park.
4d. Approve First Reading of an Ordinance amending Chapter 36 of the City Code
relating to The Shoreham Planned Unit Development.
4e. Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the water service
line at 2929 Texa Tonka Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN P.I.D. 07-117-21-44-
0038.
4f. Adopt Resolution electing not to waive the statutory tort limits for liability insurance.
4g. Reject bids for the 2015 Random Concrete Repair Project – Project No. 4015-0003 and
authorize re-advertisement for bids.
4h. Approve increasing the revolving line of credit that the City previously approved for
Homes Within Reach (HWR), also known as West Hennepin Affordable Housing
Land Trust (WHAHLT), from the current amount of $250,000 to $500,000.
4i. Adopt a resolution authorizing the submission of a Mighty Ducks Grant application to
the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission in the amount of $400,000 for The Rec
Center Refrigeration Replacement Project.
4j. Adopt Resolution supporting the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District’s Japs-Olson
Stormwater Management project, and to authorize the City Manager to sign the
Stormwater Management Agreement and the Agreement to jointly administer the
Financial Guarantee with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
4k. Adopt Resolution accepting a $1500 Donation from the American Legion Post 282 for
the purchase of equipment to support the new Fire Department Honor Guard.
4l. Approve for filing Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes May 28, 2015
4m. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 2015
4n. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes August 5, 2015
4o. Approve for filing Telecommunications Minutes May 13, 215
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV cable channel
17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at
www.parktv.org, and saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in
the lobby of City Hall and on the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon
on Friday on the city’s website.
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. This report and discussion is to provide
an additional check in with Council prior to setting the 2016 preliminary levy.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the Council comfortable with setting the 2016 Preliminary
Property Tax Levy increase of 6.5% on September 21, 2015? If not, what would the Council like
staff to bring back for consideration on September 21, 2015?
SUMMARY: At the study session on August 24, Council discussed information and setting the
preliminary levy for 2016. After review of information and discussion, there was a consensus to set
the preliminary levy at 6.5% levy increase. As in past years, the 2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levy
adopted by the City Council on September 21, 2015, can be decreased, but cannot be increased after
that date. This special study session is to provide time for discussion and a final check in prior to
setting the preliminary levy.
Attached is the report and materials from the August 24, 2015 Council Study Session. City Manager
Tom Harmening and staff are currently analyzing submitted budgets for 2016 and additional
meetings and recommendations on the 2016 budget are planned this fall.
NEXT STEPS:
September 8 (Tues) 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy to be considered at both the EDA & City Council
meetings this evening.
September 21 Council establishes 2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levy.
October 5 Public Hearing – 1st Reading on Fees.
October 12 Review and discussion of 2016 budget, CIP, utility rates and LRFMP.
October 19 Adoption of 2016 Utility Rates and 2nd Reading of Fees on Consent.
November 9 Final budget or CIP discussion prior to Truth in Taxation Public Hearing. (If necessary)
December 7 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and budget presentation
December 14 Continuation of Public Hearing and any budget discussion. (If necessary)
December 21 Council adopts 2015 Revised Budget, 2016 Budgets, final tax levies (City & HRA),
and 2016 - 2025 CIP.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Information regarding the budget, tax levies,
CIP, and utility rates are provided in this report.
VISION CONSIDERATION: All Vision areas are taken into consideration and are an important
part of the City’s budgeting process.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: August 24, 2015 Council Study Session Report
2016 Budget Calendar (Updated)
2016 – 2025 CIP Funding Source Summary
2016 – 2025 CIP Projects by Dept. and Funding Source
2016 Proposed Utility Rates – Impact on a Property
Prepared by: Brian Swanson, Controller
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: August 24, 2015
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. This report is to assist with the
Study Session discussion regarding 2016 Budget recommendations, to receive direction for
further conversation at the September 8th Special Study Session, and in preparation for setting
the 2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levies on September 21, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
• Is the Council able to identify at this time what it might want to certify as a preliminary
levy on September 21, 2015? If not, what would the Council like staff to bring back for
discussion on September 8, 2015?
• Does the Council want to certify the maximum HRA levy amount for the 2016 levy?
• Does the Council have any questions or suggested changes to the attached CIP?
• Is the Council in support of the proposed utility rate adjustment plans?
• Is there other information that Council would like to review in more detail?
• Are there any other service delivery changes Council would like to have considered?
SUMMARY: Included is information pertaining to the 2016 Budget and 2016 Preliminary
General Property Tax and HRA levies. City Manager Tom Harmening and staff are currently
analyzing submitted budgets for 2016. Also included in the report are some items of significance
that are being considered. In addition, staff would like direction on any other major changes,
programs, or policies that should be evaluated during the preparation of the 2016 Budget. The
2016 – 2025 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is attached as well for the City Council to review.
Finally, there is a brief discussion on utility rates and recommended rate changes.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Information regarding the budget, tax
levies, CIP, and utility rates are provided in this report.
VISION CONSIDERATION: All Vision areas are taken into consideration and are an
important part of our budgeting process.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
2016 Budget Calendar
2016 – 2025 CIP Funding Source Summary
2016 – 2025 CIP Projects by Dept and Funding Source
2016 Proposed Utility Rates – Impact on a Property
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On June 22, 2015, staff met with the City Council to discuss the 2016
Budget Process. Council agreed that staff should follow recommendations from the “2016
Budget Production Guidelines” when preparing the 2016 Budget. Assumptions for the 2016
Budget included a pattern similar to past years; a levy increase, modest increase in other fees
and charges where appropriate to fit with business costs, maintain high quality and responsive
service delivery, hold expenditures flat where possible with adjustments for some modest
growth based on essential business needs, funding for a wage and benefit contribution increase,
utility rate increases, and continued long range financial planning. At that time the Council also
indicated that as a target it desired any levy adjustment for 2016 to be consistent with the 10
year average of 4.56%
Discussion Topics – Monday, August 24th:
The purpose of the Study Session discussion is to make sure service delivery and business needs
are congruent with Council expectations in preparing the 2016 Budget. For 2016, staff used the
budget guiding principles, as well as Vision, and the new key organizational cultural behaviors
of Collaboration, Quality and Responsiveness for preparing budget recommendations. The
Study Session discussion is intended to be at the higher/big bowl level to allow Council, if
possible, to provide levy direction to staff as well as identify other initiatives they would like
staff to add or explore. Based upon this discussion, staff can then prepare more information to
bring back to the City Council as needed at a later date.
Below is the order of the budget presentation and discussion for this Study Session:
1. Discussion on overall budget, requests and council requested items for staff to explore.
2. Answer any City Council questions on the 2016 – 2025 CIP (Capital Improvement Plan).
3. 2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levy range discussion.
4. 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy discussion.
5. 2016 Utility Rates and impact.
6. Council questions, comments, expectations, and data requests for upcoming meetings,
including the budget calendar.
The 2016 Preliminary Budget Items of Significance:
Legislative directives:
• There are no levy limits in place for 2016.
• Local Government Aid has been approved to be issued in accordance with a formula set
by the state. Currently the City is scheduled to receive $539,434 in 2016, which is
$26,965 more than the $512,466 allocated in 2015. These dollars go into the Capital
Replacement Fund as in previous years.
Staffing Costs & Wages: Funds for staffing are the largest expenditure of the City’s operating
budget. In building the 2016 budget recommendations, a wage adjustment of 2.5% is being used
as an assumption. As a reminder, all 5 union contracts are open for 2016.
Benefits: For 2016 the City has received a favorable renewal from HealthPartners for an
average premium increase of 12%. Staff continues to work with the City’s benefits consultant
and internal benefits committee on cost containment on claims. Based on last year’s input from
staff, and the philosophy adopted by the City to fund coverage differently for employee only
versus employees who cover dependents, we recommend $319,200 be set aside in 2016 for an
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
increased benefit contribution (this averages to an additional $100 per employee per month to
cover increased premium costs). Staff plans to bring more information to Council in the near
future on recommended plan design and employer contribution. The wellness incentive benefit
for 2015 and beyond was set at $40 per employee per month ongoing until a change is
recommended (this will remain at $40 per employee per month for 2016).
PERA Coordinated Plan: Employee contribution of 6.50% of salary and employer
contribution of 7.50% of salary in 2015 will remain the same in 2016.
PERA Police and Fire: Employee contribution of 10.8% and employer contribution of 16.2%
in 2015 will remain the same in 2016.
Summary of Significant 2016 Budget Personnel Requests That Are Included:
The most significant requests received from departments in the 2016 budget relate to staffing.
Original requests from departments for additional staff range from approximately $751,000 to
$973,000 depending on the staffing model being proposed ($101,000 of this is reserved for any
other compensation adjustment, if needed, for market or other changes related to basic
compensation program). This amount does not include the cost of the standard adjustment for
wages and benefits. All requests are in the process of being reviewed by the City Manager with
each applicable Department Head. We anticipate some changes will be made to the staffing
requests and the City Manager will bring the Council more detailed information and
recommendations this fall. In order to determine the final recommendations staff will continue
to review business needs and funding and also look at alternatives for service delivery with
some requests and moving some requests to future year(s) for consideration. Below is the
summary of staffing requests and funding recommendations. Note – these are the staffing
requests made by Department Directors and do not constitute at this time a recommendation
from the City Manager.
What staffing additions or changes are requested at this time for 2016?
• Administrative Services - Election Judges - $36,000 – Cyclical for Presidential election.
General Fund is funding source.
• Engineering - Civil Engineer – FT benefit earning - $90,288 – The position would spend
time working on Connect the Park, Pavement Management and transportation planning
initiatives. Funding would come from the General Fund and utilize temporary salaries of
$25,000 currently budgeted with the remaining funded via the Pavement Management
Fund and Connect the Park (Sidewalk and Trails Fund) for approximately $32,600 each.
• Fire Department - Overtime - $5,000 – Increase suggested based on call volume and
covering shift work. Funding is the General Fund.
• Fire Department - Paid on Call (POC) - $70,912 – Increase in POC volume and staffing.
Funding is the General Fund.
• Fire Department provided 2 staffing options for consideration. The City Manager and
Fire Chief will continue discussions on operations, business needs and future staffing
models for consideration and anticipate a final recommendation from the City Manager
this fall.
o Option 1 – Add a career 24/7 Firefighter slot (3 FTE = 1 firefighter slot) and
Community Risk Reduction Intern - $334,750 – Positions requested for increased
service needs in the community, being more proactive and more resilient. The
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
career firefighter slot actually requires the hiring of 3.45 firefighters to fill the
one slot at approximately $89,800 per full FTE. – Funding is the General Fund.
o Fire Department – Option 2 – FT Fire Inspector (1 FTE) and Community Risk
Reduction Intern - $113,500 – Positions requested for increased service needs in
the community, and being more proactive and more resilient. Funding is the
General Fund.
• Inspections – Temporary Construction Codes Inspector - $31,000 – To allow for
increased inspection services next spring or summer, if needed, assuming construction
continues or grows from the current pace. General Fund is the funding source.
• Inspections – Property Maintenance Intern - $3,904 – Conduct city wide assessment of
all single family properties related to property maintenance and take follow up action as
necessary. General Fund is the funding source.
• Operations and Recreation – Organized Rec., Rec. Center and Pool - $47,190 –
Minimum wage increases. General Fund is the funding source.
• Operations and Recreation – Rec. Center – Overtime – $(5,000) – Decrease in overtime
due to rink renovations for the General Fund. Overtime costs will return to 2015 levels
in 2017.
• Police - Officer – FT benefit earning - $85,172 - To continue to support moving from 4
districts to 5 districts as undertaken in 2015 to meet patrol staffing levels. As discussed
in 2015, one position was added this year and this second positon was held for 2016.
Given the strong growth occurring in the community and the anticipated growth
associated with SWLRT, it is important to remain proactive versus reactive to community
needs. General Fund is the funding source.
• Operations and Recreation – Utility Funds - Public Service Worker FT benefit earning -
$70,000 - To support Utilities operations, storm water initiatives, plowing and sidewalk
maintenance. To assist staff with overall maintenance operations and work in
coordination with other maintenance divisions. This was discussed in the 2015 budget
process for addition in 2016. Utility Funds will fund this position.
• Operations and Recreation – Solid Waste – Intern - $15,600 – Request due to increase
demands in the Solid Waste Programs funded via the Solid Waste Fund. It is also
recommended to add an additional full time employee in this area to help with education,
programs and outreach in solid waste including working on multi-family programs. The
recommended funding level for this position is $71,613.
• Community Development – Development Fund – Economic Development Specialist
increase from 0.8 FTE to 1.0 FTE - $19,200 – Request due to increase redevelopment
support small business initiatives and projects within the City.
Summary of Significant 2015 Budget Non-personnel Requests That Are Included:
• Administrative Services – Increased expenditure projections came in for estimated
property, liability and casualty insurance and recording fees for minutes totaling
approximately $35,000.
• Engineering – Increase of $30,000 for MN State Statute required traffic signal timing
optimization.
• Fire – A cumulative increase in revenues of approximately $70,000 based on historical
receipts for fire and sprinkler alarm permits, Fire Insurance Premium Tax and a new
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 6
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
potential revenue for Park Nicollet Post Discharge Program. The cumulative increase in
expenditures is approximately $77,000 for supplies, small tools, repairs, increased
compliance testing or equipment, CERT member training, professional development and
wellness.
• Information Resources – Increase of $16,360 for computer services for LOGIS,
Hennepin County and Zuercher Tech.
• Inspections – Proposed increase of permit revenues of approximately $170,000 based on
historical and projected projects in 2016.
• Operations and Recreation – Revenues are projected to decline by $230,000 due to
rink renovation in 2016 from March to October. This one time decrease will be offset
with revenue from fund balance from the General Fund. On the expenditure side, the
cumulative increase of these proposed changes is $4,000 for required inspections,
equipment for the pool and reductions based on historical costs.
• Police - The cumulative increase for the budget changes submitted is $14,700 and
encompasses items such as Taser replacements, ammunition increase costs, postage and
software licenses.
• Cable TV Fund – Staff recommends continuing with the plan to reduce the transfer
from the Cable TV Fund to the General Fund by $25,000 per year. Reducing the annual
transfer by $25,000 each year through 2019 and by $34,506 in 2020 will improve
sustainability in the fund until the franchise fee agreement expires in 2021. At that point,
if no new agreement is available, the fund could operate through 2022 and into early
2023 before running out of resources as currently budgeted.
• Development Fund – Proposed Park the Street III event totaling approximately $25,000.
• Housing Rehabilitation Fund – Aggregate decrease of $13,000 for the Discount Loan,
Foreclosure and Move-up Programs based on historical costs.
• Utility Funds – Proposed increases of approximately $4,600 for estimated insurance
increases.
Fees, Charges and Other Revenues - Staff will continue to review current fee data based on
cost analyses and other communities before making recommendations for the 2016 Fee
Schedules for the Council to consider later this year.
CIP (Capital Improvement Plan) - Staff has completed the first and second round work on the
CIP, and a report is attached. This information has been programmed into the LRFMP, and
Accounting is analyzing the results in an effort to create long-term sustainability in funds and is
also looking at where changes in funding or expenditures/expenses need to occur for the City
Council and City Manager to consider.
LRFMP (Long Range Financial Management Plan): This document will be presented at
future meetings with Council to assist in setting property tax levies, fees, utility rates and
budgets.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 7
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levy
In working to develop a 2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levy for the City Council to consider,
there are some important key items to keep in mind:
• Funding challenges in several funds impacting long-term sustainability
• As in past years, the 2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levy adopted by the City Council
on September 21, 2015, can be decreased, but cannot be increased after that date.
Trends in Valuations and Possible Property Tax Implications:
For the 2015 assessment, St. Louis Park’s taxable market value increased by 8.0% with all of the
dominant property types increasing in value. Composition of the change is summarized as
+4.9% for single-family homes, +9.9% for condos and townhomes, +14.1% for apartments, and
the commercial-industrial sectors at +8.6%. As can be surmised by the above figures, there will
be a shift of the property tax burden to commercial and apartment properties for the Payable
2016 tax period. This shift will be mitigated somewhat when considering all taxing jurisdictions
that make up the typical property tax bill (in the aggregate, other County jurisdictions increased
at higher rates for single-family homes but at lower rates for apartments and commercial properties).
Fiscal Disparities:
The City’s proposed net contribution decreased by $710,663 or approximately 18.3% for 2016.
The City is a net contributor to the pool of $3,168,815, or approximately 5.1% of the City’s total
tax capacity for 2016.
2015 City Final Levy and 2016 City Preliminary Levy Range
A synopsis of prior year levy information and the 2016 Proposed Preliminary Levy Range is
shown below:
1. The 2015 Final Levy was $26,985,377, which was 5.50% or $1,407,469 more than 2014.
2. Based on the assumptions noted below, at this point in time the budgets which have been
submitted would require a 2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levy range increase of
approximately 5.50% - 6.50% more than the 2015 Final Levy.
a. The 5.50% levy increase would allow the tax levy supported staffing adjustments
noted earlier in this report, including Option 2 for the Fire Department, changes
in business related expenditures as noted in this report, but no substantial changes
to existing programs, nor adding any new programs or initiatives.
b. A 6.50% levy increase would allow Council to fund the staffing adjustments and
business related expenditures noted earlier in this report including Option 2 for
the Fire Department. In addition, this levy amount would allow for additional
property tax dollars to be allocated to the Capital Replacement Fund of
approximately $325,000. These additional dollars would help stabilize financial
needs in this fund or they could also be utilized entirely or in part for other new
initiatives or programs the Council would like to undertake.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 8
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
HRA Levy
Based on current and future infrastructure needs, the HRA Levy is recommended to be set at the
maximum allowed of 0.0185% of estimated market value for the 2016 Budget, which is
consistent with previous years. This levy is committed to pay back a loan from the
Development Fund that helped cash flow the City’s obligation for Highway 7 and Louisiana and
is expected to be paid off in 2021. By law these funds could also be used for other housing and
redevelopment purposes but considering the significant infrastructure needs within the City, the
proceeds have not been used for housing. Therefore, staff has calculated the maximum HRA
Levy for 2016 to be $1,011,208 based on valuation data from Hennepin County. This is an
increase of $57,970 or 6.08% from 2015. Staff is recommending the 2016 Preliminary HRA
Levy be set at the maximum.
Utility Funds: All utility funds will be presented during the budget process as in previous years
with a review of rates in accordance with the City’s Long Range Financial Management Plan
(LRFMP). As in previous years, all utility rates are analyzed and adjusted as needed to meet
operational and capital needs, while also working to meet appropriate cash position guidelines.
• Water: For 2016, the City will be in the sixth year of the ten year plan for increasing the
fixed rate charges to reduce volatility in the fund due to seasonality usage fluctuations.
Usage rates will also be increased to meet more aggressive demands for infrastructure
replacement within the City’s aging system. Significant expenses for this fund are
capital, staffing, the Reilly Superfund site and debt service.
• Sewer: Rates are also expected to increase due to the City’s more aggressive
infrastructure replacement plan. Sewer costs are mainly to support the Metropolitan
Council of Environmental Services charge (MCES), staffing and capital costs.
• Solid Waste: Rates for this fund are expected to remain flat or increase very slightly
depending on any enhanced or new initiatives the Council would like to pursue with
multi-family recycling and organics. The major expenses for this fund are the contract
charges and staffing.
• Storm Water: Based on Council direction to place more emphasis on storm water
management, along with increasing regulations, rates will need to continue to increase
significantly over the next three to four years. These increases will help meet the
increased capital needs and debt service obligations when debt is most likely issued in
2016. Significant expenses for this fund currently are capital and staffing.
What do the possible proposed utility rate increases mean to a typical homeowner?
Based on operational and capital needs being anticipated in the utility funds, the increase will be
$50 - $60 per year for a typical homeowner. A typical homeowner in this scenario is a family of
four who uses 30 units of water per quarter (22,500 gallons), and has 60 gallon service, which is
consistent with prior year scenarios. Staff will bring back specific recommendations on
September 8th when it receives final MCES charges for the Sewer Fund in the next week or two.
Based on those recommendations, Council can request modifications in utility rates leading up
the October 19, 2015 meeting where Council will be asked to adopt the 2016 utility rates which
will be in place for consumption or services provided beginning on January 1, 2016.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1) Page 9
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
NEXT STEPS: As the 2016 budget process continues, the following preliminary schedule
snapshot has been developed for Council:
September 8 (Tues) High level 2016 Budget, CIP, fees, and utility rates discussion.
Department Directors or their designees will also be in attendance. This
meeting will be more of a proposed preliminary levy discussion with
direction provided to staff to prepare information for the September 21st
meeting adopting preliminary levies.
September 21 Council and EDA establish 2016 preliminary property tax levies.
(Levies can be reduced, but not increased for final property tax levies.)
October 5 Public Hearing – 1st Reading on Fees.
October 12 Review and discussion of 2016 budget, CIP, utility rates and LRFMP.
Directors or their designees in attendance as needed.
October 19 Adoption of 2016 Utility Rates and 2nd Reading of Fees on Consent.
November 9 (If necessary) Final budget or CIP discussion prior to Truth in Taxation
Public Hearing and budget presentation.
December 7 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and budget presentation
December 14 (If necessary) Continuation of Public Hearing and any budget discussion.
December 21 Council adopts 2015 Revised Budget, 2016 Budgets, final tax levies (City
and HRA), and 2016 - 2025 CIP.
City of St. Louis Park
2016 Preliminary Budget Calendar
Date Department(s) Description
March 30, 2015 All 2016–2025 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is available for update.
May 5, 2015 @ 4:30 pm All CIP access restricted to Read-Only
June 22 CM/Admin/Acctg. Study Session with Council to discuss 2016 Budget and assumptions.
June 23 @ 11am-noon All
Meet with Departments to discuss any significant changes in business
or staffing after meeting with City Council.
June 23 @ 4:30 pm All
All 2016 Budget worksheets available in Insight to all departments.
All revenues and expenditures are to be budgeted including review of
fee schedule and Utility Rate Analyses.
July 6 – 17 @ 4:30pm All 1st Review/Edit of 2016 – 2025 CIP by Departments
July 28 @ 4:30pm All Staffing requests and major changes in programs due to Accounting.
July 28 @ 4:30 pm Inspections Building revenue projections due to Accounting
July 28 @ 4:30 pm All 2016 Proposed Budget worksheets and fees due. Access to Read-Only.
Aug. 10 – 21 Each Department Individual review of budgets – CM, Dep. CM, Director, and Acctg.
August 24 C.M./Accounting High level 2016 Budget, CIP, Utility Rates discussion.
September 8 (Tues)
City Manager,
Directors & Acctg.
Cont. high level 2016 Budget, CIP, Utility Rates discussion with City
Manager and Accounting. Adopt 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy
Sept. 9 – 18 @4:30 pm All 2nd and Final Review/Edit of 2016 – 2025 CIP by Departments
September 21 C.M./Accounting
Approval of Preliminary 2016 Budgets, Tax Levies and Franchise
Fees (if applicable) by Council and/or EDA.
By September 30 Accounting
Certification of 2016 Preliminary Property Tax Levy due to Hennepin
County and levy reports due to State of Minnesota
October 5 Accounting/Clerk Public Hearing – 1st Reading for Fees – To Sun by 9/17 for publication
October 12
C.M., Directors and
Accounting
Review and discussion of 2016 Budget, CIP, Utility Rates and
LRFMP review and discussion by City Council.
October 12 – 20 All
Final review of all 2016 revenues and expenditures for all funds. In
addition, review of the CIP, Utility Rates and LRFMP.
October 19 Accounting Adoption of 2016 Utility Rates and 2nd Reading of Fees on Consent.
October 20 @ 4:30 pm All Final changes submitted to City Manager/Deputy C.M. and Controller
November 9 (if needed) CM/Admin/Acctg. Final Budget or CIP Discussion with City Council prior to TNT.
December 7, 2015 Accounting Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and Budget Presentation
December 14 (if needed) C.M./Accounting Council discussion of any 2016 Budget related items (if necessary)
December 21, 2015 C.M./Accounting
2016 Budget, Final Property Tax Levies (City and HRA), and 2016 –
2025 CIP approved by Council.
By December 28, 2015 Accounting Certification of tax levy and other required forms – Due 12-30-15
By December 31, 2015 Accounting 2016 Budgets uploaded from Insight into JDE.
January, 2016 Admin Services Budget completed, printed (if necessary) and on City website.
January, 2016 Accounting Summary Budget Report to OSA - due 1/31/2016.
Note: Items in blue are meetings with the City Council
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 10
Capital Improvement Program
City of St. Louis Park, MN
FUNDING SOURCE SUMMARY
2016 2025thru
Total20162017201820192020Source20212022202320242025
Cable TV - Time Warner Equipment Grant 545,900156,550 10,250 14,100 79,600 285,400
Capital Replacement Fund 37,388,8974,853,013 3,974,757 3,785,861 8,073,729 3,243,483 2,215,218 3,370,620 3,046,664 2,275,464 2,550,088
E-911 Funds 663,25036,325 111,325 36,325 106,325 36,325 36,325 116,325 36,325 111,325 36,325
EDA Development Fund 275,000185,000 45,000 45,000
G.O. Bonds 23,444,1251,017,000 1,538,625 5,062,000 6,314,000 5,747,000 1,913,000 1,052,500 100,000 600,000 100,000
Hockey Association 1,041,660104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166
HRA Levy 1,012,5421,012,542
Municipal State Aid 14,328,000882,000 1,522,000 1,770,000 3,381,000 908,000 816,500 908,500 1,380,000 1,380,000 1,380,000
Park Improvement Fund 16,570,5005,786,500 1,690,000 1,498,000 1,051,000 1,183,500 1,062,000 877,500 1,050,000 1,412,000 960,000
Pavement Management Fund 26,260,4282,162,500 3,324,250 2,581,390 2,233,750 2,951,788 3,198,250 2,105,750 2,564,250 2,564,250 2,574,250
Police & Fire Pension 3,302,000720,000 135,000 279,500 156,500 82,000 33,000 150,000 106,500 1,489,500 150,000
PW Engineering Budget 68,00065,000 3,000
PW Operations Budget 3,644,901356,388 362,364 322,605 375,547 343,008 347,489 357,500 405,500 360,500 414,000
Reilly Industries 17,50017,500
Sanitary Sewer Utility 8,462,3381,876,333 721,333 741,333 791,333 841,001 808,335 779,001 809,001 829,001 265,667
Solid Waste Utility 110,00010,000 45,000 10,000 45,000
Special Assessments 2,944,625121,000 675,625 158,000 30,000 690,000 1,200,000 70,000
State of Minnesota 1,040,0001,040,000
Stormwater Utility 10,678,6703,443,667 1,441,667 744,667 718,667 588,667 1,574,667 577,667 859,667 348,667 380,667
Tax Increment - Elmwood 3,026,5093,026,509
Tax Increment Financing 75,00075,000
U.S. Government 800,000800,000
Unfunded 6,900,000100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 6,100,000 100,000
Water Utility 27,313,5771,558,582 3,501,332 1,849,332 2,091,832 2,263,999 3,906,334 2,394,000 2,456,000 4,712,500 2,579,666
23,259,024 20,087,694 24,191,330 25,590,449 18,798,337 189,913,422GRAND TOTAL 16,805,284 12,893,529 13,018,073 23,514,873 11,754,829
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 11
Total20162017201820192020Source20212022202320242025
Report criteria:
All Address data
All Categories
All Departments
All Priority Levels
All From Street data
All Projects
All Source Types
All Street Name data
All To Street data
Status: Active or Completed or Pending
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 12
Capital Improvement Program
City of St. Louis Park, MN
PROJECTS & FUNDING SOURCES BY DEPARTMENT
2016 2025thru
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
Buildings
31150001 30,000City Hall Garage Overhead Doors 30,000
31160001 100,000City Hall Roof Top AC Units (two units)100,000
31160003 20,000City Hall Garage Unit Heaters 20,000
31170001 700,000City Hall Council Chambers Remodel 700,000
31170002 30,000City Hall Remodel 2nd and 3rd floor
restrooms
30,000
31190001 15,000City Hall Electric Vehicle Charger 15,000
31200001 60,000City Hall Timber Retaining Walls 60,000
31210001City Hall/Police Campus Landscaping 15,00015,000
31230001City Hall ITE & Gould Elect Panel
Replacement
25,00025,000
31250001CH Windows, Wall Coatings and
Caulking Replacement
200,000200,000
32160002 20,000PD Dispatch Kitchen Remodel 20,000
32170001 60,000Police Station replace boiler system 60,000
32180002Police Station - Replace office
furnishings
210,000210,000
32180004Police Station Concrete Sidewalk 15,00015,000
32180005Police Station Replace Window Blinds 25,00025,000
32190001Police Station Remodel Restrooms 75,00075,000
32190002 45,000Police StationShooting Range Exhaust 45,000
32200001 7,000Police Station Water Heaters 7,000
32230001Police Station Replace Light Fixtures 80,00080,000
32230003Police- Replace Ceiling Tiles 40,00040,000
33140002 15,000 15,000MSC & Fire Stations CO Nox Sensor
Replacement
75,00015,000 15,000 15,000
33160001 20,000MSC Bay'sConvert HVAC to Digital
Controls
20,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 13
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
33160002 20,000MSC Pavement and Curb Repair 20,000
33170001 20,000MSC Convert Exterior HID to LED 20,000
33170002 75,000MSC Service Bay Sealant and Stripping 75,000
33170003 12,000MSC Manual Wash Replacement 12,000
33180001MSC Service Bays-Striping 00
33180002MSC Fuel Station Pump Controls 25,00025,000
33190001 15,000MSC Air Compressor Replacement 15,000
33190002 50,000MSC 3rd Bay Sealant and Stripping 50,000
33190003 180,000MSC Car Wash Unit Replace with
Automatic
180,000
33200003 50,000MSC 2nd Bay-Sealant 50,000
33210001MSC 2nd Floor Office Carpeting/Floor
Covering
15,00015,000
33210002MSC Paint Booth Maintenance 25,00025,000
33220001MSC Bays 1, 2 & 3 Roofing 400,000400,000
33220002MSC Campus Landscaping 10,00010,000
33240001MSC Interior Light Fixtures Replacment 100,000100,000
33250001MSC Fuel Station Replacement 50,00050,000
34160002 100,000Fire Stations 1 & 2 Apparatus bay floor
coating
100,000
34160003 20,000Fire Stations 1 & 2 Garage Door Loops
Closing Sys
20,000
34170001 65,000Fire Station 1 & 2 Fire Truck Exhaust
Capture
65,000
34180001Fire Station 1 & 2 audio/visual
replacements
10,00010,000
34190001 50,000Fire Station #1 Training Tower
modifications
50,000
3424001FS #1 and #2 Carpet Replacement 35,00035,000
35240001Fire Station #1 and #2 Landscaping 15,00015,000
3525001Fire Station #2 Replace light fixtures 45,00045,000
36190002 5,000,000Westwood Naturce Center new building 5,000,000
37170001 60,000Rec Center Remodel Offices 60,000
40181600Parking Lot - City Hall East 110,000110,000
40181601Parking Lot - Westwood Nature Center 34,02034,020
40181602Parking Lot - MSC 70,62070,620
40201600 38,588Parking Lot - City Hall Lower 38,588
40201601 17,850Parking Lot - Fire Stn #1 17,850
40201602 12,600Parking Lot - Fire Stn #2 12,600
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 14
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
8,314,000345,000 1,022,000 300,000 5,310,000 177,000Capital Replacement Fund 130,000 425,000 195,000 165,000 245,000
283,678214,640 69,038Pavement Management Fund
8,597,678345,000 1,022,000 514,640 5,310,000 246,038Buildings Total 130,000 425,000 195,000 165,000 245,000
8,597,678345,000 1,022,000 514,640 5,310,000 246,038Buildings Total 130,000 425,000 195,000 165,000 245,000
Cable TV
11151001 120,000Van Cameras 120,000
11161001 750Announcer Headsets 750
11161002 500Shotgun mics 500
11161003 300Hand-held mics 300
11161004 35,000Replacement edit systems 35,000
11171001 2,000Wireless mic systems 2,000
11171002 7,000CG 7,000
11171003 250CD Player 250
11172006 1,000Announcer intercom,1,000
11181001300-foot audio snake & reel 2,0002,000
11181002Announcer Monitor 300300
1118100350-foot audio snake 400400
11181004Behringer Audio Equipment 1,5001,500
11181005Camcorders 7,5007,500
11181006DVD recorders 1,5001,500
11181007Unit pro light kit 900900
11191001 500DVD Recorders 500
11191002 30,000Slow-motion replay 30,000
11191003 70012-channel audio mixer 700
11191004 500Shotgun mics 500
11191005 300Hand-held mics 300
11191006 10,200NLE stations 10,200
11191007 900Microphones 900
11191008 1,500Tripods 1,500
11191009 35,000Replacement edit systems 35,000
11201001 120,000Van Cameras 120,000
11201002 20,000Van Camera Cases 20,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 15
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
545,900156,550 10,250 14,100 79,600 285,400Cable TV - Time Warner Equipment
Grant
545,900156,550 10,250 14,100 79,600 285,400Cable TV Total
11201003 13,000Van Camera Cables 13,000
11201004 15,000LCD monitors 15,000
11201005 15,000Studio cameras 15,000
11201006 900Microphones 900
11201007 900Camera monitors 900
11201008 2,500Hard-Drive Video Recorder 2,500
11201009 6,000Conveter for Recorder 6,000
11201010 36,000Tripods for On Location 36,000
11201011 4,200SD/HD converter 4,200
11201012 16,500Video Switcher 16,500
11201013 1,500DVD recorder 1,500
11201014 28,200Playback systems 28,200
11201015 4,500Production switcher 4,500
11201016 1,200Teleprompter 1,200
545,900156,550 10,250 14,100 79,600 285,400Cable TV Total
Engineering
40144000 2,250,000 650,000Storm Water- Bass Lake Preserve
Rehab
2,900,000
40151600 121,000 110,000 37,500Parking Lot Rehabilitation Project 564,000158,000 5,500 10,000 2,000 120,000
40154001 300,000Storm Water- MCWD Cold Storage Site 300,000
40160003 463,500Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 463,500
40161000 2,964,250Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 5)2,964,250
40161100 782,000Street - MSA Street Rehab (Flag &
Quentin)
782,000
40161200 269,388Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
1)
269,388
40161300 47,500 46,500Traffic Signal - Repl Control Cabinets 146,50052,500
40162000 917,000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway
Installations 2016
917,000
40163000 420,000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
5)
420,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 16
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
40164000 500,000Storm Water- Walker Pond Expansion 500,000
40170003 279,250Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250
40171000 6,144,000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 4)6,144,000
40171001 431,250Street - Reconstruction (Utica Avenue)431,250
40171100 1,119,500Street - MSA Street Rehab (Louisiana
Ave)
1,119,500
40171101 402,500Street - MSA Street Rehab (Texas S of
Mtka)
402,500
40171200 642,364Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
2 & 3)
642,364
40171300 75,000Traffic Signal- CLR at Louisiana 75,000
40171700 1,150,000Bridge - W 37th St @ Minnehaha Creek 1,150,000
40172000 1,223,000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway
Installations 2017
1,223,000
40173000 440,000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
6)
440,000
40174000 450,000Storm Water- Louisiana Oaks Pond
Rehab
450,000
40175000 275,000Water- Rehab WTP 16 Reservior 275,000
40180003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250279,250
40181000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 6)4,223,5004,223,500
40181100Street - MSA Street Rehab (CLR W of
Lou)
1,380,0001,380,000
40181200Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
4)
272,105272,105
40181700Bridge - Louisiana Ave @ Minnehaha
Creek
1,495,0001,495,000
40182000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway
Installations 2018
4,962,0004,962,000
40183000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
7)
460,000460,000
40184000Storm Water- Oregon Pond Basin
Rehab
400,000400,000
40186000Street- W36th Street Reconstruction 2,039,0512,039,051
40186001Street- Wooddale Ave Reconstruction 2,000,0002,000,000
40190003 279,250Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250
40191000 3,269,000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 7)3,269,000
40191100 1,380,000Street - MSA Street Rehab (CLR E of
Lou)
1,380,000
40191101 1,000,500Street - MSA Street Rehab (Ottawa)1,000,500
40191102 1,000,500Street - MSA Street Rehab (Beltline
Blvd)
1,000,500
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 17
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
40191200 278,047Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
5)
278,047
40192000 6,214,000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway
Installations 2019
6,214,000
40193000 480,000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
8)
480,000
40194000 270,000Storm Water- Browndale Pond Rehab 270,000
40194001 90,000Storm Water- Sumter Pond Rehab 90,000
40195000 935,000Water - Recoat Reservoir 2 @ WTP #6 935,000
40197000 3,000Street - Excelsior Blvd Resurfacing 3,000
40200003 279,250Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250
40201000 5,158,500Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 8)5,158,500
40201100 808,000Street - MSA Street Rehab (Texas Ave
N of Mtka)
808,000
40201200 284,008Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
6)
284,008
40201300 100,000Railroad - Whistle Quiet Zones 100,000
40202000 5,647,000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway
Installations 2020
5,647,000
40203000 510,000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
1)
510,000
40204000 109,000Storm Water- Lamplighter Pond Rehab 109,000
40204001 109,000Storm Water- Otten Pond Rehab 109,000
40209000 0SWLRT - Xenwood Underpass 0
40210003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250279,250
40211000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 1)5,519,0005,519,000
40211100Street - MSA Street Rehab (W28th St)816,500816,500
40211101Street - MSA Street Rehab
(Edgewood/Cambridge)
690,000690,000
40211200Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
7)
289,989289,989
40212000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway
Installations 2021
1,813,0001,813,000
40213000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
2)
520,000520,000
40214000Storm Water- Twin Lakes Sed Basin
Rehab
1,242,0001,242,000
40215000Water- Recoat Elevated Water Tower
#2
1,540,0001,540,000
40220003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250279,250
40221000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 2)4,476,5004,476,500
40221100Street - MSA Street Rehab (Shelard 908,500908,500
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 18
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
Pkwy)
40221200Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
8)
290,000290,000
40222000CTP! Sidewalk - Trail - Bikeway
Installations 2022
952,500952,500
40223000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
3)
540,000540,000
40224000Storm Water- Westdale Sed Basin
Rehab
248,000248,000
40230003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250279,250
40231000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 3)4,975,0004,975,000
40231100Street - MSA Street Rehab (TBD)1,380,0001,380,000
40231200Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
1)
300,000300,000
40233000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
4)
570,000570,000
40234000Storm Water- Cedar Manor Lake Rehab 528,000528,000
40240003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250279,250
40241000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 4)5,025,0005,025,000
40241100Street - MSA Street Rehab (TBD)1,380,0001,380,000
40241200Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
2)
300,000300,000
40243000Sanitary Sewer- Mainline Rehab (Area
5)
580,000580,000
40244000Storm Water- Flood Area #24 1,200,0001,200,000
40246000Street - I394 Ramp / CD Road
Improvement
3,000,0003,000,000
40247000Street - Excelsior Blvd (Lou - W City
Lim)
3,000,0003,000,000
40247001Traffic Signal Project - CSAH 25 @
Beltline Blvd.
500,000500,000
40250003Concrete Replacement- SW-C&G-CB 279,250279,250
40251000Street - Local Street Rehab (Area 5)5,025,0005,025,000
40251100Street - MSA Street Rehab (TBD)1,380,0001,380,000
40251200Street Mt Proj - Sealcoat Streets (Area
3)
310,000310,000
53245500Water Project - WTP #6 GAC Upgrade 2,190,0002,190,000
53245501Reilly Site - Install Monitor Well (W413)35,00035,000
121,493,7029,034,638 13,391,864 17,668,906 15,245,797 13,042,258Engineering Total 12,715,239 7,704,750 8,084,750 17,491,250 7,114,250
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 19
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
22,444,125917,000 1,438,625 4,962,000 6,214,000 5,647,000G.O. Bonds 1,813,000 952,500 500,000
1,012,5421,012,542HRA Levy
14,228,000782,000 1,522,000 1,770,000 3,381,000 908,000Municipal State Aid 816,500 908,500 1,380,000 1,380,000 1,380,000
25,976,7502,162,500 3,324,250 2,366,750 2,233,750 2,882,750Pavement Management Fund 3,198,250 2,105,750 2,564,250 2,564,250 2,574,250
68,00065,000 3,000PW Engineering Budget
1,702,401186,888 187,364 142,105 189,547 151,508PW Operations Budget 150,489 155,000 197,500 147,000 195,000
17,500Reilly Industries 17,500
6,720,000640,000 660,000 680,000 700,000 730,000Sanitary Sewer Utility 740,000 760,000 790,000 800,000 220,000
2,944,625121,000 675,625 158,000 30,000Special Assessments 690,000 1,200,000 70,000
1,040,0001,040,000State of Minnesota
9,951,0003,380,000 1,375,000 675,000 635,000 493,000Stormwater Utility 1,517,000 523,000 803,000 275,000 275,000
3,026,5093,026,509Tax Increment - Elmwood
75,00075,000Tax Increment Financing
800,000800,000U.S. Government
6,000,000Unfunded6,000,000
25,487,250845,250 3,334,000 1,771,000 1,889,500 2,200,000Water Utility 3,790,000 2,300,000 2,350,000 4,607,500 2,400,000
121,493,7029,034,638 13,391,864 17,668,906 15,245,797 13,042,258Engineering Total 12,715,239 7,704,750 8,084,750 17,491,250 7,114,250
Fire
65160001 87,000SCBA Fill Stations 87,000
65170001 77,300SCBA Radio Integration 77,300
65180001UAV 10,00010,000
65990001 8,000 8,000 8,000Thermal Imagers 88,00016,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 16,0008,000
65990002 20,000 20,000Outside Warning Sirens 80,00020,000 20,000
65990003 324,594SCBA 697,877373,283
65990004Hydraulic Rescue Tool 30,00030,000
65990005 32,000 32,000Auto-CPR Device 64,000
65990006 125,000Turnouts 275,000150,000
65990007 30,000Helmets/Boots 65,00035,000
65990008 5,250 5,500Air Monitors 23,2506,000 6,500
65990009 30,000AED's 30,000
1,527,427549,844 197,300 26,000 33,500 32,000Fire Total 178,000 14,000 436,283 8,000 52,500
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 20
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
1,527,427549,844 197,300 26,000 33,500 32,000Capital Replacement Fund 178,000 14,000 436,283 8,000 52,500
1,527,427549,844 197,300 26,000 33,500 32,000Fire Total 178,000 14,000 436,283 8,000 52,500
Operations & Recreation
20130080 5,000 5,000Oak Hill Park Northern Lights (LED)10,000
2020xxxx 0Parking Lot Seal Coat - Oak Hill Park 0
20225007Rec Center Arenas Rubber Floor
Replacement
250,000250,000
2023xxoxParking Lot Seal Coat - Dakota Park 00
2023xxxxParking Lot Seal Coat - Aquila Park 00
21160201 17,000Aquila Park Building Locks and
Security Camera
17,000
21161103 60,000Carpenter Park Ball Field Fence
Replacement
60,000
21161304 12,000Cedar Knoll Park/Carlson Field
Scoreboard
12,000
21162706 48,500Playground Eqpt Repl - Jersey Park 48,500
21162907 48,500Playground Eqpt Repl - Justad Park 48,500
21163618 34,000Louisiana Oaks Park Bldg Cameras &
Door Lock Add.
34,000
21164205 58,500Playground Eqpt Repl - Nelson Park 58,500
21164420 13,500Trail Seal Coat - Oak Hill Park 13,500
21165220 40,000Trail Reconstruction - Shelard Park 40,000
21166408 98,500Playground Eqpt Repl - Wolfe Park 98,500
21166421 13,500Trail Seal Coat - Wolfe Park 13,500
21166425 16,000Trail Lights (LED) at Wolfe Park 16,000
21170302 450,000Aquila Park Fields 1-4 Lights and Poles
Upgrade
450,000
21170507 60,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Bass Lake Park 60,000
21172106 17,500Parking Lot Seal Coat - Fern Hill Park 17,500
21174402 20,000Oak Hill Park Additional Shelter near
Splash Pad
20,000
21174404 60,000Oak Hill Park Splash Pad Feature
Replacement
60,000
21174422 50,000Oak Hill Park Central Shelter
Replacement
50,000
21174908 50,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Rainbow Park 50,000
21175809 60,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Twin Lakes
Park
60,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 21
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
21175921 10,000Victoria Lake Landscaping 10,000
21176110 60,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Webster Park 60,000
21176424 10,000Wolfe Park Pergola Work 10,000
21179919 30,000Trail Sealcoat - Various Trails 30,000
21180301Court Resurface (BB) Aquila Park 7,5007,500
21180305Parking Lot Resurface - Aquila Park 35,00035,000
21180321Repaint Park Building - Aquila Park 7,0007,000
21180611Playground Eqpt Repl - Birchwood Park 62,50062,500
21180622Repaint Park Building - Birchwood Park 7,0007,000
21181023Repaint Park Building - Browndale Park 7,0007,000
21181124Repaint Park Building - Carpenter Park 6,0006,000
21181306Parking Lot Resurface - Cedar Knoll
Park
8,0008,000
21181325Repaint Park Building - Cedar Knoll
Park
2,0002,000
21181707Parking Lot Resurface - Creekside Park 8,0008,000
21181826Repaint Park Building - Dakota Park 4,0004,000
21182127Repaint Park Building - Fern Hill Park 5,0005,000
21183628Repaint Park Building - Louisiana Oaks
Park
7,0007,000
21184208Parking Lot Resurface - Nelson Park 8,0008,000
21184229Repaint Park Building - Nelson Park 7,0007,000
21184309Parking Lot Resurface - Northside Park 35,00035,000
21184312Playground Eqpt Repl - Northside Park 62,50062,500
21184330Repaint Park Building - Northside Park 6,0006,000
21184431Repaint Park Building - Oak Hill Park 9,0009,000
21185102Court Resurface (BB) Roxbury Park 2,0002,000
21185113Playground Eqpt Repl - Roxbury Park 62,50062,500
21185203Court Resurface (BB) Shelard Park 2,0002,000
21185214Playground Eqpt Repl - Shelard Park 62,50062,500
21186210Parking Lot Resurface - Westwood Hills
NC
35,00035,000
21186404Court Resurface (BB) Wolfe Park 3,0003,000
21190304 20,000Parking Lot Seal Coat - Aquila Park 20,000
21190613 10,000Trail Reconstruction - Birchwood Park 10,000
21190714 10,000Trail Reconstruction - Blackstone Park 10,000
21191002 85,000Browndale Park Hockey Rink Lights 85,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 22
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
21191805 20,000Parking Lot Seal Coat - Dakota Park 20,000
21191815 75,000Trail Reconstruction - Dakota Park 75,000
21192116 45,000Trail Reconstruction - Fern Hill Park 45,000
21195406 65,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Sunshine Park 65,000
21195607 65,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Texa-Tonka
Park
65,000
21196308 65,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Willow Park 65,000
21199901 20,000ADA Connections to Picnic
Shelter/Playgrounds
20,000
21199917 30,000Trail Sealcoat - Various Trails 30,000
21200419 13,500Trail Seal Coat - Bass Lake 13,500
21200912 15,000Trail Reconstruction - Bronx Park 15,000
21203013 20,000Trail Reconstruction - Keystone Park 20,000
21204314 20,000Trail Reconstruction - Northside Park 20,000
21204502 65,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Oregon Park 65,000
21205403 65,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Sunset Park 65,000
21206204 100,000Playground Eqpt Repl - Westwood Hills
NC
100,000
21209901 15,000ADA Compliance Picnic Tables 15,000
21210411Trail Reconstruction - Bass Lake Park 100,000100,000
21211712Playground Eqpt Repl - Parkview Park 60,00060,000
21213614Trail Reconstruction - Louisiana Oaks
Park
65,00065,000
21213801Playground Eqpt Repl - Meadowbrook
Manor Park
60,00060,000
21214002Playground Eqpt Repl - Minikahda
Vista Park
60,00060,000
21214415Trail Reconstruction - Oak Hill Park 75,00075,000
21214803Playground Eqpt Repl - Pennsylvania
Park
60,00060,000
21216416Trail Reconstruction - Wolfe Park 85,00085,000
21219912Trail Reconstruction - Franklin 45,00045,000
21219913Trail Reconstruction - Jordan 45,00045,000
21220902Playground Eqpt Repl - Bronx Park 65,00065,000
21221403Playground Eqpt Repl - Cedar Manor
Park
60,00060,000
21221604Playground Eqpt Repl - Center Park 65,00065,000
21222401ADA Trail Compliance - Cedar Manor
Park Trail
60,00060,000
21224109Trail Reconstruction - Minnehaha Creek 50,00050,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 23
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
21230301Playground Eqpt Repl - Aquila Park 85,00085,000
21231102Playground Eqpt Repl - Carpenter Park 65,00065,000
21231503Playground Eqpt Repl - Cedarhurst
Park
65,00065,000
21234611Trail Reconstruction - Otten Pond 30,00030,000
21235112Trail Reconstruction - Roxbury Park 10,00010,000
21235813Trail Reconstruction - Twin Lakes Park 10,00010,000
21240101Playground Eqpt Repl - Ainsworth Park 65,00065,000
21240130Repaint Park Building - Cedar Knoll
Park
2,0002,000
21240306Repaint Park Building - Aquila Park 7,0007,000
21240317Trail Reconstruction - Aquila Park 75,00075,000
21240607Repaint Park Building - Birchwood Park 7,0007,000
21241002Playground Eqpt Repl - Browndale Park 65,00065,000
21241008Repaint Park Building - Browndale Park 7,0007,000
21241109Repaint Park Building - Carpenter Park 6,0006,000
21241118Trail Reconstruction - Carpenter Park 50,00050,000
21241811Repaint Park Building - Dakota Park 4,0004,000
21242112Repaint Park Building - Fern Hill Park 5,0005,000
21242719Trail Reconstruction - Jersey Park 30,00030,000
21243613Repaint Park Building - Louisiana Oaks
Park
7,0007,000
21244214Repaint Park Building - Nelson Park 7,0007,000
21244315Repaint Park Building - Northside Park 6,0006,000
21244416Repaint Park Building - Oak Hill Park 9,0009,000
21253401Trail Reconstruction - Lamplighter Park 40,00040,000
21256202Trail Reconstruction - Westwood Hills
NC
30,00030,000
21256403Wolfe Park Amphitheater Pavers 100,000100,000
21259903Trail Reconstruction 100,000100,000
21259904Playground Equipment Replacement 200,000200,000
21259905Park Shelter Replacement 150,000150,000
21259906Trail Lighting 100,000100,000
21994401 5,000 5,000Oak Hill Park Northern Lights (LED)10,000
21999902 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000Playground Woodchips 200,00020,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,00020,000
21999903 100,000 100,000 60,000Minnehaha Creek Trail Repayment 360,000100,000
22164126 17,500Minnehaha Creek Revegitation 17,500
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 24
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
22173203 25,000Knollwood Canoe Landing - Dredge
and Rebuild
25,000
22193603 10,000Louisiana Canoe Landing Landscape 10,000
22206115 15,000Webster Park Community Garden 15,000
22999901 68,000 70,000 70,000 70,000Tree Replacement 698,00070,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,00070,000
23166203 6,000Westwood Hills NC Climbing Rock
Phase II
6,000
23166222 16,000Westwood Hills NC Key Fob for Pavilion 16,000
23166223 60,000Westwood Hills NC Ravine Bridge
Replacement
60,000
23166224 55,000Westwood Hills NC Storge Garage
(30'x30')
55,000
23166228 14,000Westwood Hills NC Gate Camera
Addition
14,000
23176222 10,000Westwood Hills NC North Staircase
Overlook
10,000
23176223 20,000Westwood Hills NC-Prairie Deck
Rebuild
20,000
23196218 50,000Westwood Hills NC Boardwalk Deck
Repl, Phase 2
50,000
23196219 6,000Westwood Hills NC Brick House
Furniture Repl
6,000
23196220 150,000Westwood Hills NC Interpretive Exhibit
Repl
150,000
23206216 40,000Westwood Hills NC Staircase Rebuild 40,000
23216217Westwood Hills NC Furniture Repl 10,00010,000
23226210Westwood Hills NC Water Garden,
Phase 2
45,00045,000
23236214Westwood Hills NC Trail Bench
Replacement
15,00015,000
23246220Westwood Hills NC Boardwalk Deck
Repl, Phase 3
50,00050,000
23256203Westwood Hills NC Boardwalk Deck
Repl, Phase 1
100,000100,000
23256204Westwood Hills NC Waterfall 50,00050,000
23996227 15,000 30,500Westwood Hillls NC Master
Revegetation Plan
68,00022,500
24145019 5,650,000Outdoor Refrigerated Ice Rink 5,650,000
24165011 30,000Rec Center Banquet Room Carpet &
Floor Replacement
30,000
24165012 55,000Rec Center Fire Alarm System Upgrade 55,000
24165013 35,000Rec Center Gallery & Hallway Flooring 35,000
24165014 4,400,000Rec Center Arena Refrigeration
Replacement
4,400,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 25
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
24165015 110,000Rec Center Parking Lot Resurface 110,000
24165016 105,000Rec Center Rubber Floor
Replacement - East & West
105,000
24165017 10,000Rec Center West Arena Press Area 10,000
24175013 15,000Rec Center Banquet Room/Gallery
Furniture Repl
15,000
24175014 200,000Rec Center Pneumatics 200,000
24175016 20,000Rec Center Hot Water Heater Tank
Replacement
20,000
24175017 50,000Rec Center Programming Office AC
Replacement
50,000
24175018 17,000Rec Center Programming Office Carpet 17,000
24185015Rec Center Banquet & Gallery Remodel 50,00050,000
24185016Rec Center Door Replacement (Front &
Arena)
120,000120,000
24185017Rec Center Landscaping 15,00015,000
24185018Rec Center Roof Rplc-East
Arena/Front Office
500,000500,000
24185019Rec Center Upstairs Bthrm&Ctrng
Kitchn Remodel
100,000100,000
24185020Rec Center West Arena Window
Replacement
40,00040,000
24195010 15,000Rec Center Banquet Room & Gallery
Chair Repl.
15,000
24195011 50,000Rec Center East Arena Locker Room
Remodel
50,000
24195012 75,000Rec Center Front Office AC
Replacement
75,000
24195013 30,000Rec Center East Arena Score Boards 30,000
24205005 300,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Amenity
Replacement
300,000
24205006 50,000Rec Center Banquet Room PA Upgrade 50,000
24205008 200,000Rec Center Marquee 200,000
24205009 60,000Parking Lot Seal Coat - Rec Center 60,000
24205010 75,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Sun Shelter
Repl
75,000
24205011 10,000Rec Center Rental Skate Replacement
(Ph 1)
10,000
24215006Rec Center Arena Compressor Rebuild 15,00015,000
24215007Rec Center Arena Rubber Floor 250,000250,000
24215008Rec Center Dasher Board
Repair/Replacement
12,00012,000
24215009Rec Center Landscaping 15,00015,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 26
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
242150110Rec Center Rental Skate Replacement
(Ph 2)
10,00010,000
24225006Rec Center East Arena Painting 60,00060,000
24225008Rec Center Scoreboard Replacement 32,50032,500
24235007Rec Center Arena Compressor Rebuild 15,00015,000
24235008Rec Center Arena Water Treatment
Repl
75,00075,000
24235009Rec Center West Arena Painting 75,00075,000
24235010Rec Center West Arena Roof
Replacement
500,000500,000
24245003Rec Center East Arena
Dehumidification
400,000400,000
24245004Rec Center Generator Replacement 500,000500,000
24245005Rec Center Landscaping 20,00020,000
25160209 45,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Drp Slide &
Dvg Brd Repl
45,000
25160210 20,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Umbrellas 20,000
25170211 200,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Filter
Replacement
200,000
25170212 20,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Pump Rebuild 20,000
25170215 5,000Rec Center Concession Eqpt.
Replacement
5,000
25200217 25,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Main Drain
Replacement
25,000
25205007 5,000Rec Center Concession Eqpt.
Replacement
5,000
25220205Rec Center Aquatic Park Locker Room
Remodel
100,000100,000
25230204Rec Center Concession Eqpt.
Replacement
5,0005,000
25990212 5,000Rec Center Aquatic Park Deck Furniture 20,0005,000 10,000
40161103 100,000Street - MSA Retaining Wall (Hwy 7
SFR)
100,000
50150001 1,800,000Meter Replacement 1,800,000
50164101 155,000Street Light Annual Replacement (2016)155,000
50164301 14,500Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2016)14,500
50174101 160,000Street Light Annual Replacement (2017)160,000
50174301 15,000Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2017)15,000
50184101Street Light Annual Replacement (2018)165,000165,000
50184301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2018)15,50015,500
50194101 170,000Street Light Annual Replacement (2019)170,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 27
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
50194301 16,000Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2019)16,000
50204101 175,000Street Light Annual Replacement (2020)175,000
50204301 16,500Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2020)16,500
50214101Street Light Annual Replacement (2021)180,000180,000
50214301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2021)17,00017,000
50224101Street Light Annual Replacement (2022)185,000185,000
50224301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2022)17,50017,500
50234101Street Light Annual Replacement (2023)190,000190,000
50234301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2023)18,00018,000
50244101Street Light Annual Replacement (2024)195,000195,000
50244301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2024)18,50018,500
50254101Street Light Annual Replacement (2025)200,000200,000
50254301Traffic Signal Annual Painting (2025)19,00019,000
53165001 30,000Water Well Rehab (SLP4)30,000
53165002 67,000Water Treatment Plant GAC
Replacement (WTP1)
67,000
53165101 20,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #11)20,000
53165301 21,000Storm Sewer LS Maint (LS #1)21,000
53165302 42,000Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2016)42,000
53175001 32,000Water Well Rehab (SLP8)32,000
53175002 68,000Water Treatment Plant GAC
Replacement (WTP4)
68,000
53175003 51,000Water Well Rehab (SLP13)51,000
53175101 30,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #13)30,000
53175102 15,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #23)15,000
53175301 22,000Storm Sewer LS Maint (LS #7)22,000
53175302 44,000Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2017)44,000
53185001Water Well Rehab (SLP11)52,00052,000
53185101Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #9)45,00045,000
53185301Storm Sewer LS Maint (LS #8)23,00023,000
53185302Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2018)46,00046,000
53195001 34,000Water Well Rehab (SLP14)34,000
53195002 71,000Water Treatment Plant GAC
Replacement (WTP4)
71,000
53195003 71,000Water Treatment Plant GAC
Replacement (WTP1)
71,000
53195101 45,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #21)45,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 28
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
16,544,7522,534,553 1,638,991 2,219,395 1,636,263 1,982,349Capital Replacement Fund 952,750 2,006,486 1,442,947 1,067,530 1,063,488
1,041,660104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166Hockey Association 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166 104,166
100,000100,000Municipal State Aid
16,435,5005,651,500 1,690,000 1,498,000 1,051,000 1,183,500Park Improvement Fund 1,062,000 877,500 1,050,000 1,412,000 960,000
1,942,500169,500 175,000 180,500 186,000 191,500PW Operations Budget 197,000 202,500 208,000 213,500 219,000
1,443,0001,220,000 45,000 45,000 60,000 47,000Sanitary Sewer Utility 26,000
601,00063,000 66,000 69,000 73,000 50,000Stormwater Utility 52,000 54,000 56,000 58,000 60,000
1,512,000697,000 151,000 52,000 176,000Water Utility 74,000 75,000 77,000 76,000 134,000
39,620,41210,539,719 3,870,157 4,168,061 3,286,429 3,558,515Operations & Recreation Total 2,467,916 3,319,652 2,938,113 2,931,196 2,540,654
53195102 15,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #4)15,000
53195301 25,000Storm Sewer LS Impr (Add SCADA to
Stns 1/5/7/8/9)
25,000
53195302 48,000Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2019)48,000
53205101 47,000Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #22)47,000
53205301 50,000Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2020)50,000
53215001Water Treatment Plant GAC
Replacement (WTP4)
74,00074,000
53215100Sanitary Sewer LS Maint (LS #15)26,00026,000
53215301Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2021)52,00052,000
53225002Water Treatment Plant GAC
Replacement (WTP1)
75,00075,000
53225301Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2022)54,00054,000
53235001Water Treatment Plant GAC
Replacement (WTP4)
77,00077,000
53235301Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2023)56,00056,000
53245001Water Well Rehab (SLP10)38,00038,000
53245002Water Well Rehab (SLP4)38,00038,000
53245301Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2024)58,00058,000
53255001Water Well Rehab (SLP12)54,00054,000
53255002Water Treatment Plant GAC
Replacement (WTP4)
80,00080,000
53255301Annual Catch Basin Repairs (2025)60,00060,000
E - XX01 2,534,553 1,638,991 1,636,263 1,982,349Annual Equipment Replacement
Program
16,544,7522,219,395 952,750 2,006,486 1,067,530 1,063,4881,442,947
44,228,75216,085,553 3,765,991 4,063,895 3,182,263 3,454,349Operations & Recreation Total 2,363,750 3,215,486 2,833,947 2,827,030 2,436,488
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 29
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
Police
68,40010,700 10,700 26,200 5,200 5,200Capital Replacement Fund 5,200 5,200
145,00070,000E-911 Funds 75,000
213,40010,700 10,700 26,200 75,200 5,200Police Total 5,200 5,200 75,000
PD - 1 10,700 10,700 5,200 5,200Laser/Radar and Message Board 68,40026,200 5,200 5,200
PD - 2 70,000911 Server Replacement 145,00075,000
213,40010,700 10,700 26,200 75,200 5,200Police Total 5,200 5,200 75,000
Technology
13125001 25,000IT: Security Audit, PCI Re-Assessment
/ Training
50,00025,000
13125002IT: Server Farm / UPS Enhancements 35,00035,000
13135001 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000IT:LOGIS Hosted / Managed Services 250,00025,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,00025,000
13135003OR / Utilities: SCADA Solution 20,00010,000 10,000
13135004 20,000OR: AVL / GPS 40,00020,000
13145010Police: New CAD/RMS/Mobile Suite 550,000550,000
13145011 30,000OR: Banquet Rm Multiple Monitor /
Projector
60,00030,000
13145012 10,000OR: Rec Center Gallery / Prog Office
Monitors
20,00010,000
13155002 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000IR: Fiber - Sidewalks / Hwy 100 /
Citywide
2,000,000200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000200,000
13155004 5,000IT: Public Kiosks (City Hall, other sites)5,000
13155005 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000Admin Serv: Agenda Management
Software/Hardware
90,00010,000 10,000 10,000 10,00010,000
13155006 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000Admin Serv:Agenda Doc Mgmt
System/Microfilm Conver
150,00015,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,00015,000
13155007 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,500IR: MyStLouisPark CRM 175,00017,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 17,50017,500
13155008 100,000IR: City Hall Fl 2/3 Cabling/Chambers
AV Upgrade
100,000
13155009 20,000IR: Portable Web Cams 40,00020,000
13155010 10,000Insp: Scanner 20,00010,000
13155012 3,000 12,000Insp / OR (2016): Field iPads 15,000
13155013 20,000IR: GIS Public / Application Server 20,000
13155014 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000Admin Serv / Utilities: Infinity BI Service 20,0002,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,0002,000
13155016Eng: Survey GPS 15,00015,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 30
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
13155017Police: ZuercherTech FBR Tablet Add-
On Module
39,00013,000 13,000 13,000
13155018 43,750 3,100 3,100 3,100Admin: DocuSphere A/P Management 75,1503,100 6,600 3,100 3,100 3,1003,100
13155020 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000Police: ZuercherTech Crime Analysis
Add-On Module
100,00010,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,00010,000
13165001OR: RecTrac / WebTrac Replacement 75,00075,000
13165002 85,000IR: Study - Park Nicollet Fiber 85,000
13165003 135,000OR: Parks Facilities Fiber 135,000
13165004 100,000IR: New City Website Platform 100,000
13165006 15,000OR: Aquila Park Building Fiber 15,000
13165007 16,000 4,000 4,000 4,000Admin Serv: HR Time Management
System
52,0004,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,0004,000
13165008 100,000Fire: Zuercher Integration of Fatpot
Upgrade
100,000
13165009 200,000 20,000 20,000 20,000Insp: Electronic Plans Review Software 380,00020,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,00020,000
13175001 21,000Insp: Permits / E-Permits System
Replacement
21,000
13175002 30,000OR: Rec Banquet Rm
Smartboard/Video Conferencing
60,00030,000
13175003 125,000Fire: Station Alerting Upgrade 125,000
13185001Admin Serv: Financial / HR/Payroll App
Replacement
205,000205,000
13185002Fire: Zuercher Mobile Solution 150,000150,000
13185003Fire: Additional Station Cameras 100,00050,000 50,000
13195001 203,000Admin Serv: Utility Billing App
Replacement
203,000
13205001 50,000Fire: VHF Paging Upgrade 50,000
13215001OR: MSC Smartboard 15,00015,000
13995001 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000IT: On-going Software Licenses, Mtce,
Development
2,000,000200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000200,000
13995002 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000IT: On-going Network Adds &
Replacement
1,000,000100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000100,000
13995003 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000IT: On-going Hardware/Telephone
Adds & Replacement
1,500,000150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000150,000
13995004 600,000Police/Fire: 800 MHz Radio/Console
Replacements
1,500,000900,000
13995006 100,000 125,000Police: Mobile Replacements 475,000125,000 125,000
13995007 75,000Fire / Police: Dispatch Voice Recorders 155,00080,000
13995008 8,000OR: Square Rigger Mobile Devices 16,0008,000
13995009 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000IR / Communications: Reverse 911 -
ParkAlert
150,00015,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,00015,000
13995010Eng: Engineering Total Station 25,00025,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 31
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
13995011 46,998 46,998 46,998 55,001OR: Asset Mgmt Software 518,00346,998 110,004 55,002 55,00255,002
13995012Fire: Fire Department Mobiles
Replacement
30,00010,000 10,000 10,000
13995013 10,000 15,000Fire: EOC Computer / Phone
Equipment Replacement
55,00015,000 15,000
13995014Admin Serv: Council Tablets 55,00015,000 20,000 20,000
13995015 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000IT: Tablet / Smartphone Hardware and
Services
2,000,000200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000200,000
13995016Facilities: City Hall Cameras 54,00027,000 27,000
13995017 16,000 16,000 16,000 16,000Admin Serv - Insight Budgeting Annual
Maintenance
160,00016,000 16,000 16,000 16,000 16,00016,000
13995019OR: Nature Center Surveillance
Cameras
110,00055,000 55,000
13995020 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000IT: Network Switches 225,00025,000 25,000 25,000 25,00025,000
13995021Police: Jail Cameras 46,00023,000 23,000
13995022Police: Exterior Cameras 24,00012,000 12,000
13995023Police: Booking and Intox Room
Cameras (2)
13,0006,500 6,500
13995024Police: Dispatch Camera Viewing
Workstations
110,00055,000 55,000
13995025 35,000OR: Rec Center / Outdoor Rink
Cameras
160,00045,000 35,000 45,000
13995026 16,000 16,000 16,000 16,000IT: Surveillance Camera Maintenance 160,00016,000 16,000 16,000 16,000 16,00016,000
13995027 10,000OR: Point of Sale Equipment
Replacements
20,00010,000
13995029 7,500 7,500IT: Plotter Replacements 37,5007,500 7,5007,500
13995030OR: Rec Center PA / Sound 50,00050,000
13995031 45,000OR: MSC Cameras 90,00045,000
13995034 225,000IT: Server/Backup/UPS/DR/Storage
Infrastructure
450,000225,000
13995035 100,000IT: Telephone Handset / Handless
Upgrades
200,000100,000
13995036 10,000Eng: Large Scanner / Plotter / Copier 20,00010,000
13995037 100,000Fire: Stations Media Package 200,000100,000
13995039 8,000Admin Serv: UB Meter Reading
Handhelds (if no AMR)
8,000
13995040 6,500Police: Interview Room Cameras 13,0006,500
13995041 10,000 10,000IT: Wireless Hotspots 50,00010,000 10,00010,000
13995042 21,325 21,325 21,325 21,325Police: Zuercher CAD Module Annual
Fees
213,25021,325 21,325 21,325 21,325 21,32521,325
13995043 20,000 100,000Police: Comm Van Upgrades / EOC
Media Package
240,000120,000
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 32
Total20162017201820192020Department20212022202320242025
10,934,3181,412,916 1,105,766 1,214,266 1,088,766 1,046,934Capital Replacement Fund 949,268 919,934 972,434 1,034,934 1,189,100
518,25036,325 111,325 36,325 36,325 36,325E-911 Funds 36,325 116,325 36,325 36,325 36,325
275,000185,000 45,000EDA Development Fund 45,000
1,000,000100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000G.O. Bonds 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
135,000135,000Park Improvement Fund
3,302,000720,000 135,000 279,500 156,500 82,000Police & Fire Pension 33,000 150,000 106,500 1,489,500 150,000
299,33816,333 16,333 16,333 31,333 64,001Sanitary Sewer Utility 42,335 19,001 19,001 29,001 45,667
110,00010,000 45,000Solid Waste Utility 10,000 45,000
126,67066766766710,667 45,667Stormwater Utility 5,667 667 667 15,667 45,667
900,000100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000Unfunded 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000
314,32716,332 16,332 26,332 26,332 63,999Water Utility 42,334 19,000 29,000 29,000 45,666
17,914,9032,622,573 1,585,423 1,773,423 1,559,923 1,628,926Technology Total 1,308,929 1,424,927 1,363,927 2,844,427 1,802,425
61990001 22,000Police-LPR replacement 22,000
17,914,9032,622,573 1,585,423 1,773,423 1,559,923 1,628,926Technology Total 1,308,929 1,424,927 1,363,927 2,844,427 1,802,425
28,804,858 19,983,528 24,087,164 25,486,283 18,694,171Grand Total 194,521,76216,701,118 12,789,363 12,913,907 23,410,707 11,650,663
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 33
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
ESTIMATED QUARTERLY UTILITY BILL
ACTUAL 2015 AND PROPOSED 2016
August 24, 2015
Household Size 4
Units per quarter 30
Solid Waste Service 60-gallon
Meter size 3/4 inch
Actual Proposed Dollar Percent
Service Type 2015 2016 Change Change Notes
Water
Per unit rate - Tier 1 1.55$ 1.66$ 0.11$ 7.10%
Service charge 19.91$ 22.35$ 2.44$ 12.26%
State testing fee 1.59$ 1.59$ -$ 0.00%
Consumption 46.50$ 49.80$ 3.30$ 7.10%
Sewer
Service charge 14.52$ 15.54$ 1.02$ 7.02%
Per unit 2.84$ 3.04$ 0.20$ 7.04%
Consumption 85.20$ 91.20$ 6.00$ 7.04%
Storm Drainage
Service charge 19.36$ 21.30$ 1.94$ 10.02%
Bassett Creek Fee*1.93$ 1.93$ -$ 0.00%Bassett Creek fee
Solid Waste (includes tax)68.05$ 67.50$ (0.55)$ -0.81%
Total Bill without Bassett*255.13$ 269.28$ 14.15$ 5.55%Not including BCWMC
Increase per quarter (dollars)14.15$
Increase per year (dollars)56.60$
* Since not all property owners would be charged this fee, it is not included in the dollar or percentage change in total bill.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates Page 34
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. Staff desires Council feedback on a
draft ordinance on polystyrene food and beverage containers. Based on Council feedback the
draft ordinance will then be used to inform the community and business stakeholders prior to an
October Listening Session on this matter.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to make any changes to the draft ordinance?
SUMMARY: At the August 10, 2015 Study Session, Council discussed polystyrene packaging
goals and direction after hearing from an experts panel at the July 27 Study Session. It was the
consensus of the Council to continue to pursue regulation of polystyrene food and beverage
containers, using an ordinance similar to the City of Minneapolis’ Environmentally Acceptable
Packaging Ordinance, but not including exemptions for hospitals and nursing homes. Council
directed staff to prepare a draft ordinance for Council’s consideration prior to the Polystyrene
Listening Session, which is scheduled for October 13. This report includes background, present
considerations, an overview of key elements of the proposed ordinance (including discussion on
sections of the ordinance that may have notable impact on businesses), and next steps. The draft
ordinance language is provided as an attachment to the report.
NEXT STEPS:
1. Public Information Process – using draft ordinance – September/October 2015
2. Listening Session – receive public comment –October 13, 2015
3. Study Session discussion – Proposed ordinance recommendations – November 2015
4. Public Hearing on Council’s draft ordinance position – November 2015
5. Study Session discussion – Finalize ordinance – December 2015
6. Council Meeting - Ordinance approval – TBD
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The implementation, education and
enforcement of the proposed ordinance will impact the 2016 budget.
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
Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
Prepared by: Kala Fisher, Solid Waste Program Coordinator
Reviewed by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: City Council directed staff in May 2015 to research options for regulating
the use of polystyrene food and beverage containers (polystyrene containers) in addition to
pursuing an education and outreach approach to reduce the use of these materials. An expert’s
panel discussion was planned as part of the process to provide Council with information on this
topic.
Council had particular interest in the City of Minneapolis’ Environmentally Preferable
Packaging Ordinance, now referred to as the Green To Go Ordinance, and were given a
presentation by Minneapolis Health Department staff about their ordinance during the
Polystyrene Experts Panel on July 27, 2015. During that expert’s panel, in addition to
Minneapolis staff, Council also received testimony from the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, Hennepin County Energy & Environment, Plastics Foodservice Packaging Group, Litin
Paper/Eco, TwinWest Chamber, Restaurant Association of MN, MN Beverage Association, and
Eureka Recycling.
During the August 10, 2015 Study Session, Council decided to continue to move forward in
pursuit of regulating polystyrene containers. Council directed staff to draft goals and a proposed
ordinance using Minneapolis’ Green To Go ordinance as a model, with some changes. The most
significant difference was to remove the exemption for hospitals and nursing homes. The
purpose of drafting an ordinance at this point in the process was to allow stakeholders to view
the draft ordinance and react to it at an October Listening Session on polystyrene.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The draft ordinance language is taken from the Green To Go
ordinance, and includes goals of waste reduction and environmental sustainability. Waste
reduction includes reducing landfill volume, minimizing air pollution from incineration, as well
as increasing traditional recycling and organics recycling. While additional goals were discussed
by Council, they would be difficult to directly link to this ordinance, and therefore are not
reflected in the proposed ordinance language.
ORDINANCE ORVERVIEW: Staff consulted the City Attorney regarding which chapter of
the city code the ordinance should be located. The draft ordinance is written as a division of
Chapter 12 Environment and Public Health code. Sections of the draft ordinance (attached) are
referenced in the overview below, as well as impacts that Council may want to consider.
1. Legislative Purpose/Goals (Sec.12-121): To increase traditional recycling and organics
recycling while reducing waste and environmental impact from disposable food and
beverage packaging associated with food and beverages prepared for immediate
consumption.
2. Definition of Zero Waste Packaging (Sec.12-122): Reusable, Returnable, Recyclable, or
Compostable packaging.
• Reusable or Returnable – capable of being refilled or returned for reuse at least
once (examples: growlers, milk containers, bulk product packaging).
• Recyclable – common recyclable glass, aluminum, and plastic food and beverage
containers that have strong recycling markets. In the case of plastic packaging,
plastics #1, #2, and #5 are considered recyclable.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
• Compostable – Certified compostable plastics that meet the ASTM testing
standards, as well as paper products that can be composted.
Considerations for Zero Waste Packaging Definition - Both rigid and expanded/foam
polystyrene are #6 plastics and not considered zero waste packaging due to the lack of
strong recycling markets. Plastic lined paper cups and other paper packaging lined with
plastic are not considered zero waste packaging due to commercial composting facilities
restrictions on this type of material.
3. Meeting the Zero Waste Packaging Definition through Onsite Recycling/Organics
Recycling (Sec.12-123): Packaging only meets the definition of zero waste packaging if
the food establishment provides the opportunity to recycle recyclable packaging through
front of house collection bins, as well as having contracted hauling service that hauls
recyclables to a recycling facility. Similarly, compostable packaging only meets the
definition if the food establishment provides organics recycling collection through front
of house collection bins, as well as contracted hauling service that hauls organic material
to a commercial composting facility.
Considerations for Onsite Recycling/Organics Recycling – This requirement will affect
businesses that do not currently have recycling collection available to their consumers. It
will also affect businesses that will opt to use compostable packaging, as they would be
required to add organics recycling for their consumers. The businesses would also need to
make sure that their contracted service be changed to include recycling and/or organics
recycling service from a licensed solid waste contractor. Some businesses/property
owners in St. Louis Park may have limited space for additional dumpsters and will need
to assess whether solid waste enclosures need to be expanded or garbage dumpsters
downsized to accommodate this. Hennepin County Business Recycling Grants would be
a resource for these businesses and/or property owners.
4. Who it affects (Sec.12-122(c) and 12-123(a)): The ordinance applies to anyone owning,
operating or conducting a licensed food establishment. St. Louis Park food
establishments are licensed by Hennepin County. The ordinance also applies to any
person or organization providing free food or beverage products, which would require a
license.
• A food establishment by definition of Hennepin County Ordinance 3, includes:
Restaurants, boarding houses, drive-ins, bars, taverns, cafeterias, delicatessens,
snack bars, grocery stores, retail bakeries, convenience stores, caterers, cafes,
charter boats, satellite or catered feeding locations, catering food vehicles, food
delivery services, food delivery vehicles, carts, clubs, lodges, commissaries, youth
camps, itinerant and other short term food operations, lodging facilities, resorts,
public and private schools, public buildings, group child care centers, vending
machines, and similar businesses and establishments, etc.
Considerations for Licensed Food Establishment Definition – The definition of a food
establishment encompasses a broad range including cafeterias, caterers, snack bars and
public and private schools. The implications of this definition will require further
discussion with Hennepin County Health Department. Implications of providing free
food pursuant to a license may affect organizations that provide free food to low-income
individuals and families.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Title: Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
5. Enforcement and Penalties (Sec.12.124 and 12.127): An enforcement mechanism is not
currently defined. Penalties will require an update to administrative penalties in the City
Code.
Considerations for Enforcement and Penalties – Enforcement requires further discussion
with Council and with Hennepin County Health Department. In initial discussions with
the Health Department, during their routine inspections they were willing to identify non-
compliant businesses for the city, but would not enforce a city ordinance.
6. Development of Exemptions (Sec.12-125 and 12-126): This draft ordinance includes
authority to allow staff to develop exemptions for packaging that does not meet the
definition of zero waste packaging, such as lids or plastic lined paper cups. The
determination criterion is based on availability, economic consequences, and competitive
effects of requiring zero waste packaging for affected products. Exemptions are reviewed
annually.
• Note that exemptions for hospitals, nursing homes, and lids have not been
included in the draft ordinance, per Council request (hospital/nursing homes are
currently exempted through Minneapolis’ ordinance, and lids and other items not
meeting their definition of acceptable packaging are temporarily exempted
through staff review process).
7. Implementation (Sec.12.129): The suggested implementation is anticipated to be about
one year after adoption, approximately January 1, 2017 given the current process and
timeline.
Considerations for Implementation Time-frame – The time from adoption to
implementation could be used to educate businesses on the ordinance, allow time to use
up non-compliant packaging, procure recycling/organics bins and hauling service, and
determine if exemptions for certain packaging products are required.
SUGGESTED NEXT STEPS:
The following are suggested next steps in the process to create an ordinance for polystyrene food
and beverage containers.
1. Public Information Process – to inform stakeholders using draft ordinance –
September/October 2015
2. Listening Session – receive public comment – October 13
3. Study Session discussion – Proposed ordinance recommendations – November 2015
4. Public Hearing on Council’s draft ordinance position – November 2015
5. Study Session discussion – Finalize ordinance – December 2015
6. Council Meeting - Ordinance approval – TBD
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 2) Page 5
Title: Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
D R A F T
ORDINANCE NO. ____ - 15
ORDINANCE TO INCREASE TRADITIONAL RECYCLING
AND ORGANICS RECYCLING OF
FOOD AND BEVERAGE PACKAGING AND TO-GO CONTAINERS
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
CHAPTER 12 – Environment and Public Health
Division IV. ZERO WASTE PACKAGING
12-121. - Legislative purpose.
The city council (council) finds that discarded packaging from foods and beverages prepared for
immediate consumption constitutes a portion of the waste stream in St. Louis Park that could be
diverted for reuse, recycling, or organics recycling. Regulation of food and beverage packaging,
therefore, is a necessary part of any effort to encourage a recyclable and compostable waste
stream, thereby reducing the disposal of solid waste and the economic and environmental costs
of waste management for the citizens of St. Louis Park and others working or doing business in
St. Louis Park.
The council further finds that plastic packaging is rapidly replacing other packaging material,
and that some plastic packaging used for foods and beverages is nonreusable, nonreturnable,
nonrecyclable and noncompostable.
The council also finds that the two (2) main processes used to dispose of discarded nonreusable,
nonreturnable, nonrecyclable and noncompostable plastic food and beverage packaging are land
filling and incineration, both of which should be minimized for environmental reasons.
The council therefore finds that the minimization of nonreusable, nonreturnable, nonrecyclable
and noncompostable food and beverage packaging originating at retail food establishments and
at events providing food and/or beverages within the city of St. Louis Park is necessary and
desirable in order to minimize the city's waste stream, so as to reduce the volume of landfilled
waste, to minimize toxic by-products of incineration, and to make our city and neighboring
communities more environmentally sound places to live.
12.122. - Definitions.
As used in this chapter, the following terms and phrases shall have the meanings as defined in
this section:
(a) Packaging shall mean and include food or beverage cans, bottles or containers used to
package food and beverage products for distribution including glasses, cups, plates,
serving trays, and to-go containers. The following exclusions apply: foods pre-packaged
by the manufacturer, producer or distributor; plastic knives, forks and spoons sold or
intended for use as utensils; and plastic films less than ten (10) mils in thickness.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 2) Page 6
Title: Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
(b) Zero waste packaging shall mean and include any of the following:
(1) Reusable and returnable packaging: Food or beverage containers or packages, such
as, but not limited to, water bottles, growlers, milk containers and bulk product
packaging that are capable of being refilled at a retail location or returned to the
distributor for reuse at least once as a container for the same food or beverage;
(2) Recyclable packaging: Packaging that is separable from solid waste by the
generator or during collection for the purpose of recycling including glass bottles,
aluminum cans and plastic food and beverage packaging that have robust recycling
markets. For the purposes of this chapter, zero waste plastic packaging includes the
following plastic types:
a. Polyethylene Terephthalate (#1 PET or PETE);
b. High Density Polyethylene (#2 HDPE); and
c. Polypropylene (#5 PP).
(3) Compostable packaging: Packaging that is separable from solid waste by the
generator or during collection for the purpose of composting. Compostable
packaging must be made of paper, certified compostable plastics that meet ASTM
D6400 or ASTM D6868 for compostability or other cellulose-based packaging
capable of being decomposed through commercial composting or anaerobic
digestion.
(c) Food establishment, as used in this chapter, means a "food establishment" as defined in
by Chapter 3.3.1 Hennepin County Code of Ordinances.
12.123. - Prohibitions and duties.
(a) No person owning, operating or conducting a food establishment or any person or
organization providing free food or beverage products within the city of St. Louis Park
pursuant to a Hennepin County permit or license, or in a manner which would require a
permit or license, shall do or allow to be done any of the following within the city: Sell
or convey at retail or possess with the intent to sell or convey at retail any food or
beverage intended for immediate consumption contained, at any time at or before the
time or point of sale, in packaging which is not zero waste packaging. The presence on
the premises of the food establishment of packaging which is not zero waste packaging
shall constitute a rebuttable presumption of intent to sell or convey at retail, or to
provide to retail customers packaging which is not zero waste packaging; provided,
however, that this subparagraph shall not apply to manufacturers, brokers or warehouse
operators, who conduct or transact no retail food or beverage business.
(b) Packaging used to contain food or beverages intended for immediate consumption shall
be considered zero waste packaging only when the food establishment provides
consumers with an opportunity to recycle and/or appropriately manage compostable
packaging and compostable plastics and utilizes a qualified recycling and/or organics
management system.
(1) A qualified recycling system shall have the following elements:
a. A clear and verifiable process for separating recyclable packaging from
discarded solid waste; and
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 2) Page 7
Title: Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
b. Collection and delivery of recyclable packaging to a recycling facility for
processing in the same or at least similar manner as recyclable packaging
collected in a city approved recycling program.
(2) A qualified organics recycling system shall have the following elements:
a. A clear and verifiable process for separating organic materials from discarded
solid waste; and
b. Collection and delivery of organic materials to a food to people, food to
animals, organics composting or anaerobic digestion facility in the same
manner or at least similar manner as organic materials collected in a
municipally approved organics management program.
12.124. - Enforcement.
TO BE DETERMINED
12.125. - Rules and regulations.
The Public Works Division may, upon notice and hearing, promulgate such rules and regulations
as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter and protect the health of the public,
including the development of exemptions under section 12.126 for packaging for which there is
no reasonable commercially available alternative. In promulgating such rules, the division shall
consider the legislative purposes provided in section 12.121 of this chapter and shall consult with
the operators of affected food establishments.
12.126. - Exemptions.
Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, this chapter shall not apply to:
(a) Any packaging which is not zero waste packaging, but for which there is no
commercially available alternative as determined by the Public Works Division by rule
promulgated pursuant to section 12.125. In determining whether there are commercially
available alternatives, the Public Works Division shall consider the following: (1) the
availability of zero waste packaging for affected products; (2) the economic
consequences to manufacturers, suppliers, retailers and other vendors of requiring zero
waste packaging when available; and (3) the competitive effects on manufacturers,
suppliers, retailers and other vendors involved in the sale of product brands or labels
available only in packaging that is not zero waste packaging. Every rule creating an
exemption under this paragraph shall be reviewed annually by the Public Works
Division to determine whether current conditions continue to warrant the exemption.
12.127. - Penalties.
Each violation of any provision of this chapter or of lawful regulations promulgated under
section 12.125 hereof shall be punishable as an administrative offense pursuant to City Code
Ordinance 2420-12, Section 1-14 Administrative Penalties.
12.128. - Severability.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 2) Page 8
Title: Draft Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance
If any part or provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person, entity, or
circumstances shall be adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such judgment shall be confined in its operation to the part, provision or application
which is directly involved in the controversy in which such judgment shall have been rendered,
and shall not affect or impair the validity of the remainder of this chapter or the application
thereof to other persons, entities, or circumstances.
12.129. - Effective date.
This ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2017.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council _______________
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
:ULWWHQ5HSRUW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Update on Connect the Park! – 2015 Bikeways
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time. Formal action for final Council
approval of the 2015 Bikeway project is scheduled for September 21, 2015. Please inform staff
of any questions you might have.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council want to begin the installation of the
proposed 2015 bikeway segments?
SUMMARY: Connect the Park! is the city's 10-year Capital Improvement Plan to add
additional sidewalks, trails, and bikeways throughout the community. This initiative proposes to
build 10 miles of sidewalk, 3 miles of trail, 3 bridges, and 32 miles of bikeways.
The primary goal of Connect the Park! is to develop a comprehensive, city-wide system of
sidewalks, trails, and bikeways that provides local and regional connectivity, improves safety
and accessibility, and enhances overall community livability. This is achieved by creating a
system plan that provides sidewalks approximately every ¼-mile and bikeways every ½-mile in
order to improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity throughout the community.
The City is in the second year of construction of sidewalks and trails and has built over 3.3 miles
of sidewalk and 1.6 miles of trails since 2014. This fall will be the first year of the installation of
various bikeway segments within St. Louis Park. The City is planning on adding 7 miles of
bikeways this year.
Bikeway is the general term used during the adoption of the Connect the Park! program to
describe the various types of bike facilities that range from a “Share the Road” application to
designated bike lanes. Additional information and exhibits of these various applications can be
found in the Discussion section of the report.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time. The construction cost
estimate for the 2015 project is still being finalized. These improvements will be funded using
General Obligation bonds.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Joseph Shamla, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The Connect the Park! Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) was approved by
Council in June of 2013. The plan is to install 32 miles of bikeways in the City. Bikeways are
the general term used for various types of bike facilities that range from a “Share the Road”
application to designated bike lanes.
Staff uses best management practices for determining the appropriate bikeway for each particular
roadway. The following criteria were looked at when determining the most appropriate bike
facility for each road.
● On-street parking
● Intersections and driveways
● Right-of-way constraints
● Vehicle turn lane configuration
● Number of traffic lanes
● Topography, grades, sight distances and sight lines
● Traffic composition, especially volume of large trucks
● Bus routes
● Peak-hour vehicle traffic volume
● Average daily and peak-hour bicycle traffic volume
● Bicyclist characteristics
An additional key factor in the analysis was to avoid changing the width of the roadway.
Widening of the street is expensive and typically starts to impact existing boulevard trees,
driveway grades and property lines.
BIKE FACILITIES: There are two main types of bikeways that are proposed to be installed
this fall. “Share the road” and bike lanes. Each type of bike facility is described in the following
paragraphs.
SHARE THE ROAD: Shared lane pavement markings (or “sharrows” as they are nicknamed)
are bicycle symbols carefully placed to guide bicyclists to the best place to ride on the road,
avoid car doors and remind drivers to share the road with cyclists. Unlike bicycle lanes, sharrows
do not designate a particular part of the street for the exclusive use of bicyclists. They are simply
a marking to guide bicyclists to the best place to ride and help motorists expect to see and share
the lane with bicyclists.
“Share the road” streets are typically lower volume and speed roadways that include signage and
pavement markings (sharrows) to help motorists and bicyclists to be more aware of the
expectations.
What Sharrows mean for Motorists:
• Expect to see bicyclists on the street
• Remember to give bicyclists three feet of space when passing
• Follow the rules of the road as if there were no sharrows
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
What Sharrows mean for Bicyclists:
• Use the sharrow to guide where you ride within the lane
• Remember not to ride too close to parked cars
• Follow the rules of the road as if there were no sharrows
“Share the road” streets typically do not restrict on street parking. Parked cars, traveling
motorists and bicyclists are expected to all utilize the roadway.
SHARE THE ROAD – ISOMETRIC VIEW - FIGURE 1
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 4
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
SHARE THE ROAD – CROSS SECTION VIEW – FIGURE 2
BIKE LANES: A bike lane is a portion of the roadway or shoulder designated for exclusive or
preferential use by people using bicycles. Bicycle lanes are distinguished from the portion of the
roadway or shoulder used for motor vehicle traffic by striping, marking, or other similar
techniques. Bike lanes are typically five or six feet wide. Most streets are not wide enough to
allow designated travel lanes, bike lanes and parking lanes. Therefore, parking is typically
restricted to one side (or both side) of the roadway in order to fit the travel and bike lanes within
the existing curb lines.
BIKE LANES – ISOMETRIC VIEW – FIGURE 3
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 5
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
BIKE LANES – CROSS SECTION VIEW – FIGURE 4
PROPOSED 2015 CONNECT THE PARK! BIKEWAY SEGMENTS
In total, 5 bikeway segments are recommended for installation in 2015. This equates to over 2.9
miles of new “Share the Road” bike facilities and 4.1 miles of bike lanes.
This is the first construction season for the bikeway plan. Staff has utilized the last six months to
consider design options and to engage the public in the design process.
An open house was held on August 12, 2015 as an opportunity for residents to learn more about
the proposed 2015 bikeway segments and to gain insight in to the potential impacts to on street
parking. Approximately 16 household attended the meeting and were able to look over large
format layouts and ask questions of staff. There were many comments made via the comment
cards and follow up emails to staff. These comments will be available in the final council report
on September 21, 2015.
The goal of the meeting was to educate the residents on the process and gain feedback regarding
their concerns and issues related to the proposed bikeways. Many residents asked questions,
wrote post it notes on the layouts and provided suggestions for modifications to this base design.
The following are the key issues staff heard at this open house:
• Concern about loss of on street parking
• Concern with signage in front yards
• Bikeways were not needed
If property owners were unable to attend the meetings, or if they had specific concerns that they
wanted to walk through, staff met with them on site. Using the information gathered from the
open house, individual site visits, phone calls and emails, staff revised the bikeway design to try
to minimize the number of impacts within the right of way.
ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATION: Staff continues to receive feedback from residents,
neighborhood groups and businesses on the proposed bikeways. Staff will include the
correspondence from residents with the Council report on September 21, 2015.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 6
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
BIKEWAY SEGMENTS
Texas Avenue – Cedar Lake Road to Wayzata Boulevard
Segment Overview and Design: Approximately one mile (in each direction) of on street
bike lanes are proposed to be installed on Texas Avenue from Cedar Lake Road to
Wayzata Boulevard. This segment will have a designated 6 foot wide north and south
bound bike lane. From 13th to 14th Street north bound will have a designated bike lane
but south bound will be “share the road” due to the limited roadway width.
Parking Revisions: In order to facilitate dedicated travel lanes and bike lanes parking is
proposed to be removed from one side of the road. See Figure 5 for the location of the
parking restrictions as the side of the road changes as you move along the corridor.
Cost: The engineering cost estimate for this segment of bike lane is still being finalized
and will be part of the report on September 21, 2015.
Construction Schedule: This bike lane is planned to be installed in October after the
Texas Avenue sidewalk project is complete.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 7
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
TEXAS AVENUE BIKE LANES – FIGURE 5
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 8
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
Flag Avenue, Westmoreland Lane and Franklin Avenue
Segment Overview and Design: Approximately 7000 feet (in each direction) of “share
the road” bike facilities are proposed to be installed on Flag Avenue, Westmoreland Lane
and Franklin Avenue.
Parking Revisions: There are no changes proposed to the existing on street parking.
Cost: The engineering cost estimate for this segment of bike lane is still being finalized
and will be part of the report on September 21, 2015.
Implementation Schedule: Proposed to be implemented in October of 2015.
FLAG/WESTMORELAND/FRANKLIN SHARE THE ROAD – FIGURE 6
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 9
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
Shelard Parkway, Ford Road and Wayzata Boulevard
Segment Overview and Design: Approximately 1.1 miles (in each direction) of on street
bike lanes are proposed to be installed in the Shelard Parkway and Ford Road area along
with Wayzata Boulevard from Ford Road to 14th Street. There will be a designated bike
lane for each direction of travel. The bike lane is proposed to be 6 feet wide. Due to the
unique city boundaries in this area the bike lane along Wayzata Boulevard will have a
gap from Ford Road to the bridge over 394. Staff is continuing to coordinate future
segments that cross over in to Minnetonka and Golden Valley with the respective cities.
Parking Revisions: Parking is currently not allowed on any of these street segments.
Cost: The engineering cost estimate for this segment of bike lane is still being finalized
and will be part of the report on September 21, 2015.
Construction Schedule: This bike lane is proposed to be installed in October of 2015.
SHELARD PKWY, FORD ROAD AND WAYZATA BLVD BIKE LANES – FIGURE 7
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3) Page 10
Title: Update on Connect the Park! 2015 Bikeways
NEXT STEPS: The proposed schedule for the segments recommended by staff to facilitate
construction in 2015 is shown below.
Council Study Session September 8, 2015
Council Approval of Project Report September 21, 2015
Construction October 2015
Staff will present the final report and a “No Parking” resolution for Texas Avenue at the
September 21, 2015 Council meeting.
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Written Report: 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Arlington Row Apartments West Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. The purpose of this report is to update
Council on the status of the application and neighborhood input.
SUMMARY: Melrose Company expressed interest in redeveloping two vacant properties along
Wayzata Boulevard, previously owned by MnDOT, for multi-family housing. The properties are
currently unplatted and referred to as the Texas Avenue site and the 13th Lane site. (A map is
attached showing their locations.) The Council indicated they were generally supportive of the
redevelopment concept presented at its February 2, 2015 Study Session and that it would be
willing to consider Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Amendments and Planned Unit
Developments (PUD) for the sites to facilitate the development concepts. The City purchased the
two properties from MnDOT and subsequently sold them to Melrose in July of this year.
The City received applications for the Texas Avenue site for a development titled “Arlington
Row Apartments West.” The applications are for a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
Amendment, Preliminary and Final Plat, and Preliminary and Final PUD. The development
consists of two, three-story buildings with 17 units in each building. There are a total of 34 units
providing a density of 24 units per acre. All parking is provided on-site in a surface parking lot.
The buildings consist of a mix of one- and two-bedroom units with some two-story units.
A neighborhood meeting was held August 12, 2015. The neighborhood expressed very strong
concerns regarding existing traffic and the potential for additional traffic and on-street parking,
as well as the loss of open space. There was support for the architecture and project scale. Staff
has requested a traffic study that considers both redevelopment sites and the results should be
received prior to the public hearing. The public hearing is scheduled for the September 16, 2015
Planning Commission meeting.
The redevelopment proposal requires a land use change from Low Density Residential to
Medium Density Residential and a rezoning from R-1 Single-Family Residence to PUD. Staff
anticipates applications for the 13th Lane Site this fall.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: No financial assistance is requested.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Map of Development Sites, Arlington Row West Site
Excerpt of Development Plans
Prepared by: Ryan Kelley, Planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Michele Schnitker, Deputy Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Arlington Row Apartments West Update
Melrose Development Sites
elness swenson graham architects
500 washington avenue south
m inneapolis m innesota 55415
p. 6 1 2 . 3 3 9 . 5 5 0 8
f. 6 1 2 . 3 3 9 . 5 3 8 2
w w w . e s g a r c h . c o m
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or
r e p o rt was prepared by m e or under m y direct
supervision and that I am a duly licensed architect
under the laws of the State of M innesota
Signature
Typed or Printed Nam e
License # D ate
PROJECT NUM BER
D RAW N BY CHECKED BY
O RIGINAL ISSUE:
R EVISIO NS
KEY PLAN
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
**D R A F T **7/9/2015 9:55:47 AMA S2.1
R EFERENCE IM AGES
2 15515
A uthor C hecker
0 7/07/15
A RLINGTON ROW
A RLINGTON ROW
S T. LO UIS PARK, M N
P UD / COM P PLAN
- 7/10/2015
No.De scription Date
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4)
Title: Arlington Row Apartments West Update Page 3
EXISING TREE LINE
52' - 1 1/2"55' - 0 1/2"TRUENORTHRETAINING WALL
CIVIL 920.0
919.5
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
A9
A10
A12A13A14A15A16A17A18A19A20A21A22A23A24A25A26A27A28
A45A42A43A40A41A38A39A36A37A34A35A32A33
A11
14' - 7"15' - 0"24' - 3 3/4"29' - 1 1/4"
917.27TC
1:20.0
920.0
921.0
918.8
A31
TYPE A UNIT - REF
BUILDING PLANS FOR
INTERIOR LAYOUT
919.5
920.5
919.5 919.5
920.5
BLDG A
BLDG B
TRASH /
RECYCLE
2
AS1.2
920.0
A1
TEXAS AVENUE SOUTH WAYZATA BOULEVARD24' - 0"
A44
A52
A51
A50
A49
A48
A47
A46
A29A30
10' - 0"5' - 0"5' - 0"CURB
10' SET BACK
5' - 0"CURB TO BUILDING29' - 3"6' - 0"6' - 0"8' - 9"18' - 0"8
4
.
7
8
°
BIKE STORAGE
BIKE RACKS
elness swenson graham architects
500 washington avenue south
m inneapolis m innesota 55415
p. 6 1 2 . 3 3 9 . 5 5 0 8
f. 6 1 2 . 3 3 9 . 5 3 8 2
w w w . e s g a r c h . c o m
I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or
r e p o rt was prepared by m e or under m y direct
supervision and that I am a duly licensed architect
under the laws of the State of M innesota
Signature
Typed or Printed Nam e
License # D ate
PROJECT NUM BER
D RAW N BY CHECKED BY
O RIGINAL ISSUE:
R EVISIO NS
KEY PLAN
N O T F O R
C O N S T R U C T IO N
**D R A F T **8/19/2015 9:26:05 AMA S1.2
A RCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
- SITE A - "TEXAS"
2 15515
E SG E SG
A RLINGTON ROW
A RLINGTON ROW
S T. LO UIS PARK, M N
P UD / COM P PLAN
- 8/7/2015
1/16" = 1'-0"AS1.2
1 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
PARKING COUNT - TEXAS SITE
Texas Site
A ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL 3
S STANDARD 8'9" X 18'0"49
52
UNIT MATRIX - SITE A - TEXAS
Count
Unit
Type Name
SF Unit
(Paint to
Paint)
Gross
Unit
Rentable
(Per Unit)
Total
Gross Unit
Rentable
(=Rentable
* Count)
Bed
rooms
Total
Beds
BUILDING A - SITE A
LEVEL 1
2 1A 2 BED 786 SF 863 SF 1,726 SF 2 4
2 1B 2 BED (2 STORY) 956 SF 1,088 SF 2,176 SF 2 4
4 1C 1 BED 545 SF 545 SF 2,181 SF 1 4
8 6,083 SF 12
LEVEL 2
3 2A 2 BED (2 STORY) 1,000 SF 1,123 SF 3,369 SF 2 6
2 2B 2 BED (2 STORY) 1,029 SF 1,168 SF 2,336 SF 2 4
4 2C 1 BED (2 STORY) 672 SF 753 SF 3,012 SF 1 4
9 8,717 SF 14
17 14,800 SF 26
BUILDING B - SITE A
LEVEL 1
2 1A 2 BED 786 SF 863 SF 1,726 SF 2 4
2 1B 2 BED (2 STORY) 956 SF 1,088 SF 2,176 SF 2 4
4 1C 1 BED 545 SF 545 SF 2,181 SF 1 4
8 6,083 SF 12
LEVEL 2
3 2A 2 BED (2 STORY) 1,000 SF 1,123 SF 3,369 SF 2 6
2 2B 2 BED (2 STORY) 1,029 SF 1,168 SF 2,336 SF 2 4
4 2C 1 BED (2 STORY) 672 SF 753 SF 3,012 SF 1 4
9 8,717 SF 14
17 14,800 SF 26
34 29,600 SF 52
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS - 34
BUILDING FOOTPRINT(S) - 5,578 (X2)
BUILDING GROSS SF - 15,831 (X2)
SITE AREA - 1.397 ACRE
DENSITY - 24.3 UNITS / ACRE
No.De scription Date
PLANNORTH0 1 68 3 2
1/16" = 1'-0"AS1.2
2 TEXAS SITE ELEVATION
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4)
Title: Arlington Row Apartments West Update Page 4
18.025.018.0
8.08.8
MODULAR
RETAINING
WALL WITH 6'
TALL CEDAR
FENCE
MODULAR
RETAINING
WALL WITH
RAILING
WHERE WALL IS
30" OR TALLER
BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT
CONCRETE
SIDEWALK
TYP.
(5) CONCRETE PATIOS
WITH SCREEN WALL.
SEE ARCHITECTURAL
(5) CONCRETE PATIOS
WITH SCREEN WALL.
SEE ARCHITECTURAL
CONCRETE
SIDEWALK
TYP.
CONCRETE
SIDEWALK
TYP.
CONCRETE
PAVEMENT
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
W/CONCRETE
PAVEMENT
3 STAIRS
3 STAIRS
2 STAIRS SEE
ARCHITECTURAL
2 STAIRS SEE
ARCHITECTURAL
2 STAIRS SEE
ARCHITECTURAL
2 STAIRS SEE
ARCHITECTURAL
PEDESTRIAN
RAMP
PEDESTRIAN
RAMP
BITUMINOUS
PAVEMENT
8.5
18.0
24.0
18.0 8.5
8.0
(7) BIKE
STALLS
(25) INTERIOR
BIKE
STORAGE
(8) BIKE
STALLS
LOUCKS
W:\2015\15186.0A\CADD DATA\CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\C2-1 SITE PLANPlotted: 08 /18 / 2015 4:54 PM7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300
Maple Grove, MN 55369
763.424.5505
www.loucksinc.com
PLANNING
CIVIL ENGINEERING
LAND SURVEYING
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
ENVIRONMENTAL
CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are
instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely
with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used
on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion
of this project by others without written approval by the
Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be
permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for
information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional
revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be
made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions
or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the
Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities.
CADD QUALIFICATION
SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS
PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE
QUALITY CONTROL
Arlington Row
Apartments
West
St. Louis Park, MN
Melrose Company
22375 Murray Street
Excelsior, MN 55331
07/10/15 CITY SUBMITTAL
08/10/15 CITY RE-SUBMITTAL
08/19/15 CITY RE-SUBMITTAL
C1-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS
C1-2 PRELIMINARY PLAT
C1-3 PRELIMINARY PLAT
C2-1 SITE PLAN
C3-1 GRADING PLAN
C3-2 SWPPP
C4-1 SANITARY & WATERMAIN
C4-2 STORM SEWER
C8-1 DETAILS
C8-2 CITY DETAILS
L1-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN
L2-1 TREE INVENTORY PLAN
N
WARNING:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL
EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN
MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES.
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT
LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES,
CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE
DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED
DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.
SITE PLAN GENERAL NOTES
1.SETBACKS:
FRONT BUILDING SETBACK = 30 FT
SIDE BUILDING SETBACK = 9 FT.
REAR BUILDING SETBACK = 25 FT.
2.ZONING
EXISTING ZONING =R-1 PROPOSED ZONING = PUD
3. PARKING SUMMARY BIKE COUNT SUMMARY
SURFACE REGULAR STALLS = 49 1 PER DWELLING = 34
SURFACE HANDICAPPED STALLS = 3 1 PER 10 PARKING STALLS = 6
TOTAL SURFACE STALLS = 52 TOTAL REQUIRED = 40
BIKE STALLS INSIDE = 25
BIKE STALLS OUTSIDE = 15
TOTAL PROPOSED = 40
4. AREA/DENSITY
TOTAL AREA = 60,830 SQ.FT. OR 1.396 AC.
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA = 34,647 SQ.FT. OR 0.795 AC. = 56.9%
PERVIOUS SURFACE AREA = 26,183 SQ.FT. OR 0.601 AC. = 43.1%
5. ALL PAVING, CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK SHALL BE FURNISHED AND
INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DETAILS SHOWN PER SHEET C8-1 AND THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. SEE LANDSCAPE AND ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR ANY
ADDITIONAL HARDSCAPE APPLICATIONS.
6. THE CITY AND THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST 48
HOURS PRIOR TO ANY WORK WITHIN THE STREET RIGHT OF WAY (SIDEWALK,
STREET OR DRIVEWAYS)
7. MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE REQUIRES NOTIFICATION PER "GOPHER STATE ONE
CALL" PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY GRADING, EXCAVATION OR UNDERGROUND
WORK.
8. SEE CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS FOR ANY REMOVAL DETAILS.
9. ANY SIGN OR FIXTURES REMOVED WITH IN THE RIGHT OF WAY OR AS PART OF THE
SITE WORK SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
CITY REQUIREMENTS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN ANY
EXISTING STREET LIGHTS AND TRAFFIC SIGNS PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.
10. CLEAR AND GRUB AND REMOVE ALL TREES, VEGETATION AND SITE DEBRIS PRIOR TO
GRADING. ALL REMOVED MATERIAL SHALL BE HAULED FROM THE SITE DAILY. ALL
CLEARING AND GRUBBING AND REMOVALS SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE
CONTRACT SPECIFICATIONS. EROSION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMMEDIATELY
ESTABLISHED UPON REMOVAL. (SEE SHEET C3-1)
11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS FROM THE CITY AS
REQUIRED FOR ALL WORK WITH THE STREET AND PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.
12. A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF SITE IMPROVEMENTS NOT SHOWN ON THIS SHEET ARE
DESCRIBED AND PROVIDED IN FURTHER DETAIL ON THE ARCHITECTURAL AND
LANDSCAPE PLANS. THIS INCLUDES LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING AND OTHER FIXTURES.
13. B612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE EDGE OF ALL
COMMON DRIVES AND PARKING LOTS.
14. CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
A. PEDESTRIAN RAMPS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE LOCATIONS SHOWN AND AS
SHOWN PER THE LANDSCAPE SITE PLANS.
B. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SAW-CUT BITUMINOUS AND CONCRETE PAVEMENTS
AS REQUIRED PER THE SPECIFICATIONS. REMOVE EXISTING CURB AND GUTTER
AND INSTALL B618 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER.
15. SEE SHEETS C3-1 AND C4-1 FOR GRADING AND UTILITIES.
16. ALL CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER B612, CITY'S STANDARD PLATES. (SEE DETAIL
SHEET).
17. THE INTENT OF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION IS TO PRESERVE AS MUCH OF THE
EXISTING STREET PAVEMENT AS POSSIBLE, AND TO MILL AND OVERLAY. REMOVED
PAVEMENT AREAS AND PATCHING SHALL BE INSTALLED PER PAVEMENT SECTION
PROVIDED PER DETAIL SHEET.
PAVEMENT LEGEND:
CONCRETE PAVEMENT
CONCRETE SIDEWALK
SITE PLAN
C2-1
Review Date
SHEET INDEX
License No.
Date
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was
prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that
I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the
laws of the State of Minnesota.
PJ Disch - PE
49933
Project Lead
Drawn By
Checked By
Loucks Project No.
07/10/2015
15186A
MJS
PJD
PJD
SCALE IN FEET
0 20 40
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4)
Title: Arlington Row Apartments West Update Page 5
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Written Report: 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: SWLRT Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action necessary at this time. Resolutions for funding will
be brought to the City Council for consideration at a future meeting.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the
SWLRT project relating to City funded improvements.
SUMMARY: Two additional SWLRT funding changes to the project involving City
cost participation are moving forward. One is the Beltline Station Lynn Avenue Extension and
the other is addition of stairs to the trail bridge over Beltline Boulevard and the trail underpass at
Wooddale Avenue.
Lynn Avenue Extension
Lynn Avenue Extension was originally a Locally Requested Capital Improvement (LRCI)
request and the City has a funding agreement for design and environmental work in place for
$72,230. With the reduction in the park & ride at Beltline Station, it is in the best interest of both
the City and the SWLRT Project Office (SPO) to place the Lynn Avenue Extension into the base
LRT project (drawing attached). The total estimated cost of this improvement is approximately
$3.2 million. Putting it into the base project will cost the city less than pursuing the extension or
LRCI later as it would now benefit from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding
match of 50% of the construction costs.
Stairways to Access Regional Trail
Hennepin County received a Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) grant to cover 80%
of the construction costs for the regional trail bridge at Beltline and the trail underpasses at
Wooddale Avenue and Blake Road. These improvements will be constructed as a part of the
SWLRT project. The County has requested that the cities cover the local match for only the
stairway portion of the construction. The stairways are important to encouraging use of the
grade-separated crossings and reducing the risk of people crossing the street at grade. The City’s
estimated cost for the stairs would be $164,000.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: New costs for these items will be incurred
in the 2017-18 timeframe. The City’s estimated costs are $1.6 million for the Lynn Avenue
Extension and $164,000 for the stairways to the trail.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Lynn Avenue Extension Drawing
Drawings Stairway Access to Cedar Lake Regional Trail
Prepared by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 5) Page 2
Title: SWLRT Update
DISCUSSION
Lynn Avenue Extension
As a result of the design changes this summer to reduce the overall cost of SWLRT, the Beltline
park and ride was reduced in size and the estimated cost of the Lynn Avenue Extension and
backage road construction increased. Including these improvements in the base project also
became more viable. Adding the Lynn Avenue Extension into the base project reduces its cost to
the City significantly, as the FTA will match of 50% of the construction costs. Committing to
these improvements at this time means the City will pay approximately $1.6 million for them and
will save approximately the same amount – a substantial cost savings.
Including the Lynn Avenue Extension into the base project at this time will also solidify the
street plans for the area, and set the table to move forward with development in this area. Our
work has shown that creating appropriately sized blocks within the area would be much more
conducive to preparing the area for transit-oriented development and attracting development
sooner.
Stairways to Access Regional Trail
Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District have taken a lead on funding grade separations
of the regional trail in three locations – Beltline, Wooddale and Blake (please see attached
drawing). The County received a Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) grant to cover
80% of the construction costs, and Three Rivers Park District has agreed to pay for the bulk of
the local match. The County and Three Rivers have covered the design and environmental costs
as well.
For the stairways, the grant dollars can cover 80% of the construction costs. Hennepin County
has asked the cities to cover the 20% match. For three stairways – 2 at Beltline and 1 at
Wooddale, the estimated cost is $164,000. The City will work through an agreement with the
County to fund this cost in the 2017-18 timeframe.
Summary
The estimated costs for the two items are as follows:
Estimated City Costs City Costs ’15-‘16 ’17-‘18
Lynn Avenue Extension $ 72,230 $ 1,519,198
Stairways
2 at Beltline
1 at Wooddale
Total
$ 121,000
$ 43,800
$ 164,000
There would not be any change to the current amount (previously committed) for the Lynn
Avenue Extension.
The cost for the stairways represents 20% of the total cost of the stairway construction.
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 5) Title: SWLRT UpdatePage 3
Beltline Stairways to Regional Trail
Wooddale Stairway to Regional Trail
Special Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 5)
Title: SWLRT Update Page 4
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Written Report: 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: The Shoreham Alley Vacation
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time. The purpose of this report is to
provide the Council with information on the requested alley vacation prior to formal City
Council action.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to vacate the northern half of the
alley to facilitate The Shoreham Development?
SUMMARY: Bader Development requested a preliminary and final plat and preliminary and
final planned unit development (PUD) to redevelop property at the southwest corner of France
Avenue and the CSAH 25 Frontage Road for “The Shoreham Development”. Bader also
requested that the City vacate an alley that runs through this property connecting France Avenue
to Glenhurst Avenue. The City determined that the alley was not needed for public purposes and
approved the vacation request along with the plat and PUD on June 1, 2015.
When Bader provided the approved plat to Hennepin County it was discovered that the legal
description Bader originally provided to the City for the alley vacation was incomplete; this
action is to correct this error. The intent of the developer, and of the City at the time of the
original Shoreham applications, was to vacate the entire alley. Bader Development is now
requesting the vacation of the northern half of the alley.
The alley vacation request will allow Bader to build The Shoreham as approved in the PUD by
the Council on June 1, 2015. A public hearing is required for the vacation request and is
tentatively scheduled for the September 21, 2015 Council meeting. The second reading is
tentatively scheduled for the October 5, 2015 Council meeting, on the Consent Agenda.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Ordinance
Alley Vacation Exhibit
Prepared by: Ryan Kelley, Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner
Michele Schnitker, Deputy Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 6) Page 2
Title: The Shoreham Alley Vacation
D R A F T
ORDINANCE NO.____-15
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 September 10, 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 southerly of Block 2, as dedicated in the recorded plat of
“CALHOUN LAKE SIDE PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.”, lying westerly of the
southerly extension of the east line of Lot 15, Block 2, said plat, and lying easterly of the
southerly extension of the west line of Lot 16, 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 September 21, 2015
First Reading September 21, 2015
Second Reading October 5, 2015
Date of Publication October 8, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect October 23, 2015
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council October 5, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
123456714151318171622GLENHURST AVE
FRANCE AVE SALLEY TO BE VACATED Aug 25, 2015 - 7:34am - User:587 L:\PROJECTS\DJR20165\dwg\Survey\20165-ALLEY VACATION EXHIBIT.dwg
Project No.Approved:Drawn:Designed:Rev.:Date:Initial Issue:Exhibit NumberDJR ARCHITECTURETHE SHOREHAM ADDITIONST. LOUIS PARK, MNALLEY VACATION EXHIBITGSRMB02/27/2015A08/25/2015DJR20165That part of the alley lying southerly of Block 2, as dedicated in the recorded plat of "CALHOUN LAKE SIDE PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN.", lying westerly of thesoutherly extension of the east line of Lot 15, Block 2, said plat, and lying easterly of the southerly extension of the west line of Lot 16, Block 2, said plat.DESCRIPTION OF ALLEY TO BE VACATEDSCALE IN FEET040DENOTES ALLEY TO BE VACATEDSpecial Study Session Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 6) Title: The Shoreham Alley VacationPage 3
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 17, 2015
1. Call to Order
President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Anne Mavity, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Commissioners absent: Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), Director of Community Development (Mr.
Locke), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt) and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes August 3, 2015
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
5. Reports - None
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business
7a. Establishment of The Shoreham Tax Increment Financing District. EDA
Resolution No. 15-15 and Resolution No. 15-16.
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and explained that Bader Development plans has
applied for tax increment assistance to offset the extraordinary costs to redevelop the site
and in order to reimburse the redeveloper for a portion of its extraordinary costs, a new
TIF district will need to be established and a formal analysis of the site concluded that it
meets the statutory requirements of a TIF District consisting of five parcels with a
maximum term of 25 years, however, it is estimated that the proposed project would
generate tax increment in four years and once the obligations have been satisfied, the TIF
district may be terminated. He pointed out that authorizing the TIF district in itself does
not obligate the EDA to any specific level of financial assistance and simply creates a
funding vehicle to reimburse the developer for a portion of its qualified costs.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of August 17, 2015
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 15-15 Adopting a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for
Redevelopment Project No 1, Establishing The Shoreham Tax Increment Financing
District Therein and Adopting a Tax Increment Financing Plan Therefor.
The motion passed 6-0 (Commissioner Jacobs absent).
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 15-16 Authorizing an Interfund Loan for Advance of Certain Costs in
Connection with The Shoreham Tax Increment Financing District.
The motion passed 6-0 (Commissioner Jacobs absent).
7b. Redevelopment Contract with Shoreham Apartments, LLC. EDA
Resolution No. 15-17.
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and stated that the soils on this site are impacted with
petroleum, lead, pesticides and PAHs, as well as various fill material and debris in
thicknesses ranging from 3’ to 15’ and there is also evidence of an underground storage
tank and timber piles coated in creosote and the impacted fill soil will need to be
excavated 10-20’ below grade and will require special handling and disposal. He stated
the project also requires improvements to France Avenue, storm sewer improvements,
and construction of underground parking. All together, these expenses and
improvements cost approximately $7.8 million, which prevents the project from reaching
financial viability. He advised that Bader Development has applied for TIF assistance
and while much of the extraordinary costs will be covered by grants obtained by the
developer, it was determined that a financial gap remained and but for the TIF district,
the project would not proceed and it is proposed the EDA would reimburse up to $1.2
million in qualified site preparation costs on a pay-as-you-go note. He stated that Bader
Development’s request is reasonable given the complexity and overall value of this
project and the TIF assistance is consistent with other projects. He stated that the
business terms were previously reviewed with Council and serve as the basis for the
Redevelopment Contract with Shoreham Apartments, LLC.
It was moved by Commissioner Sanger, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to adopt
EDA Resolution No. 15-17 Approving a Contract for Private Redevelopment and
Awarding the Sale of, and Providing the Form, Terms, Covenants and Directions for the
Issuance of its Tax Increment Revenue Note, Series 20__, to Shoreham Apartments LLC.
The motion passed 6-0 (Commissioner Jacobs absent).
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
President Mavity adjourned the meeting at 7:32 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Secretary President
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 5a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approval of EDA Disbursements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing EDA Disbursement Claims for the
period of July 25, 2015 through August 28, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA desire to approve EDA disbursements in
accordance with Article V – Administration of Finances, of the EDA Bylaws?
SUMMARY: The Accounting Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the EDA to
review and approve. The attached reports show both EDA disbursements paid by physical check
and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information
follows the EDA’s Bylaws and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: EDA Disbursements
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:04:29R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
106,408.93ADAGIO LLC HOIGAARD VILLAGE DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
106,408.93
240.00APADEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
240.00
75,374.50AQUILA SENIOR LLC AQUILA COMMONS G & A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
75,374.50
57,351.19BELT LINE PROPERTIES INC WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
57,351.19
23,100.30CODAMETRICSDEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MEETING EXPENSE
23,100.30
7,795.30DMD PROPERTIES LLC MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE NOTES PAYABLE-CURRENT PORTION
7,204.70MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE INTEREST/FINANCE CHARGES
15,000.00
537,221.98DUKE REALTY WEST END TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
537,221.98
94.95ECM PUBLISHERS INC HWY 25/FRANCE LEGAL NOTICES
94.95
27,887.86EDGEWOOD INVESTORS LLC EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
27,887.86
438.85EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
438.85PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
500.00HOIGAARD VILLAGE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85AQUILA COMMONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
924.85HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
Economic Development Authority Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page Page 2
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:04:29R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
351.30HARD COAT G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
10,977.50
59,060.19ELLIPSE II LLC ELLIPSE II G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
59,060.19
153,003.74ELLIPSE ON EXCELSIOR LLC ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
153,003.74
337,376.21EXCELSIOR & GRAND LLC PARK COMMONS G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
337,376.21
578,640.59GOTTMAR LLC PARK COMMONS G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
578,640.59
168.00GREEN HORIZONS 7015 WALKER-REYNOLDS WELD PROP LAND MAINTENANCE
204.004601 HWY 7 PROP ACQUISITION LAND MAINTENANCE
126.00MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE LAND MAINTENANCE
80.00PARK COMMONS G&A LAND MAINTENANCE
578.00
202,481.72HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER HSTI G&A PROPERTY TAXES
78,691.74DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PROPERTY TAXES
281,173.46
69,784.99HIGHWAY 7 BUSINESS CENTER LLC HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
69,784.99
180.00JBS BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
180.00
120.25KENNEDY & GRAVEN MCGARVEY COFFEE SITE LEGAL SERVICES
206.50DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
204.00PARK COMMONS G&A LEGAL SERVICES
530.75
3,000.00LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES
3,000.00
17,513.29MEDLEY ROW LLC HOIGAARD VILLAGE DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
17,513.29
Economic Development Authority Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page Page 3
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:04:29R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
3Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2,062.50MPCAHWY 7 & LOUISIANA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,062.50
141,983.39SH ST LOUIS PARK HOTEL PROPCO LLC CSM TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
141,983.39
207,079.48SIDAL REALTY CO LTD PARTNERSHIP LLLP MILL CITY G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
207,079.48
78,350.86ST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS BUREAU CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-CVB
78,350.86
39,159.05TP ST LOUIS PARK HOTEL PROPCO LLC CSM TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
39,159.05
125,732.91WOODDALE CATERED LIVING OWNER LP WOODDALE POINTE DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT
125,732.91
Report Totals 2,948,866.62
Economic Development Authority Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 5a)
Title: Approval of EDA Disbursements Page Page 4
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 7a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification and Budget Adoption
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the proposed
levy of a special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, and
approval of the 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy and Budget for fiscal year 2016.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA desire to continue to levy the full 0.0185% of
estimated market value allowable for HRA purposes of $1,011,208, which is an increase of
$57,970 from 2015, to assist in pay for infrastructure improvements in redeveloping areas?
SUMMARY: This levy was originally implemented in St. Louis Park due to legislative changes
in 2001 which significantly reduced future tax increment revenues. The City Council elected at
that time to use the levy proceeds for future infrastructure improvements in redevelopment areas.
Thus far, some of the HRA Levy proceeds have been used to fund infrastructure studies,
analyses for future improvement projects and are currently paying for the City’s share of
Highway 7 and Louisiana. By law, these funds could also be used for other housing and
redevelopment purposes, but they are committed to funding Highway 7 and Louisiana until 2021
based on the current Long Range Financial Management Plan. Given the significant
infrastructure needs facing the City in the future, staff recommends the HRA Levy continue at
the maximum allowed by law for the 2016 budget year. The HRA Levy cannot exceed 0.0185%
of the estimated market value of the City. Therefore, staff has calculated the maximum HRA
Levy for 2016 to be $1,011,208 based on valuation data from Hennepin County. This is an
increase of $57,970 or 6.08% from 2015. The EDA is allowed to authorize the HRA levy and
then forward this recommendation to the City Council. Council action is required before
certification, which is also scheduled to occur on September 8, 2015.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed levy will help support
infrastructure in redevelopment areas and possible affordable housing initiatives.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
2016 HRA Levy Preliminary Budget
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification and Budget Adoption
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 15 - ____
AUTHORIZING THE PROPOSED LEVY OF
A SPECIAL BENEFIT LEVY PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES,
SECTION 469.033, SUBDIVISION 6 AND APPROVAL
OF A PRELIMINARY BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA
Act”), the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority (the "Authority"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the EDA Act, the City Council granted to the Authority all of
the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the
Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and
WHEREAS, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, of the HRA Act permits the Authority to
levy and collect a special benefit levy of up to 0.0185 percent of estimated market value in the
City upon all taxable real property within the City; and
WHEREAS, the Authority desires to levy a special benefit levy in the amount of up to
0.0185 percent of estimated market value in the City for taxes payable in 2016; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.065, the Authority is required
to adopt a proposed budget and a proposed tax levy and submit the same to the County Auditor
by September 15; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has before it for its consideration a copy of a proposed budget
for its operations for the fiscal year 2016 and the amount of the proposed levy for collection in
2016 shall be based on this budget and the long range financial management plan, subject to any
adjustments in the budget as finally approved prior to certification of the final special benefit
levy.
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis
Park Economic Development Authority:
1. The proposed budget of $1,011,208 for the operations of the Authority in fiscal
year 2016, as presented for consideration by the City Council, is hereby in all respects approved,
subject to final approval by the Authority before certification of the tax levy under Minnesota
Statutes, Section 275.07.
2. Staff of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to file the proposed
budget with the City in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6.
3. The proposed special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.033, Subdivision 6, is hereby approved in a maximum amount equal to 0.0185 percent of
estimated market value in City of St. Louis Park, currently estimated to be $5,465,988,900, with
respect to taxes payable in calendar year 2015, subject to final approval by the Authority before
certification of the special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.07.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification and Budget Adoption
4. Staff of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to seek the approval by
resolution of the City Council of the levy of special benefit taxes payable in 2016 and to take
such other actions as are necessary to bring before the Board the final budget and levy to be sent
to the county auditor on or before five working days after December 20, 2015.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority September 8, 2015
Executive Director President
Attest:
Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification and Budget Adoption
2014 2015 2016
Actual Revised Budget Proposed Budget
Revenues:
Property Tax Levy 927,094$ 953,238$ 1,011,208$
Market Value Homestead Credit - - -
Interest Income 10,464 401 219
Transfer In from Development Fund 4,472,545 - -
Total Revenue 5,410,103$ 953,639$ 1,011,427$
Expenditures:
Infrastructure Projects 7,505,435$ -$ -$
Services and Other Charges 15,832 15,574 16,041
Transfer Out to Development Fund 950,000 950,000
Total Expenditures 7,521,267$ 965,574$ 966,041$
Beginning Fund Balance 2,134,066$ 22,902$ 10,967$
Net Change in Fund Balance (2,111,164)$ (11,935)$ 45,386$
Ending Fund Balance 22,902$ 10,967$ 56,353$
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Presentation: 2a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Presentation Accepting a Donation from the American Legion to the Fire Department
RECOMMENDED ACTION: St. Louis Park Fire Chief Steve Koering will be present to
accept a $1500 donation from the American Legion Post 282. A representative from the
American Legion Post 282 will be in attendance to make a formal presentation. The donation is
to be used for the purchase of equipment to support the new Fire Department Honor Guard.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept this donation with the
restrictions on its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended. In this case, the donation is to be used for
equipment and materials such as flags, axes, uniform accents etc.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used for the purchase
of materials and equipment that support the Honor Guard activities.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Steve Koering, Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 2a) Page 2
Title: Presentation Accepting a Donation from the American Legion to the Fire Department
RESOLUTION NO. 15-_____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF
A $1500 DONATION TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT
FROM AMERICAN LEGION POST 282
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donations
by the donors; and
WHEREAS, this donation will be directed toward the Fire Department Honor Guard;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that this $1500 donation is hereby accepted with thanks and appreciation.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2014
Presentation: 2b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2015 Evergreen Awards
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Mayor is requested to present the 2015 Evergreen Awards
to the following recipients:
• 1645 Idaho Ave S – Kara & James Leither (Eliot Neighborhood)
• 4251 Ottawa Ave S – Shirley Brandt (Minikahda Vista Neighborhood)
• 5020 Minnetonka Blvd – Jenny Schramm (Fern Hill Neighborhood)
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: The Evergreen Award is presented each year in recognition of properties which
are uniquely designed with well-maintained landscapes with an emphasis on parcels that are
visible to the passerby. Businesses, apartments and houses are all eligible to receive the award.
The judges selecting the Evergreen Award recipients are comprised of staff that has a keen
interest in flowers, plants, landscaping and landscape design. There were five judges inspecting
this year’s nominations.
There were eleven nominations this year spread throughout the City. Winners are presented with
an award certificate, a Dwarf Alberta Spruce tree and “Evergreen Award Winner” signs posted in
their boulevard for two weeks. Jim Vaughan, Natural Resources Coordinator, will be at the
meeting to present the awards to the three winners.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to promoting an integrating arts,
culture and community aesthetics in all City initiatives, including implementation where
appropriate.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Jim Vaughan, Natural Resources Coordinator
Reviewed by: Cindy S. Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 10, 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 Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Director of
Operations & Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke),
Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther), Solid Waste Program Coordinator (Ms. Fisher),
Public Works Services Manager (Mr. Merkley), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr.
Elkin), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Shamla), Public Works Superintendent (Mr.
Hanson), Associate Planner (Mr. Kelley), and Communications and Marketing Manager (Ms.
Larson).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – August 17 and August 24, 2015
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed special study session agenda for August 17th and the
proposed study session agenda for August 24th.
2. Polystyrene Food & Beverage Containers
Ms. Fisher presented the staff report and noted that the staff report includes additional
information requested by Council regarding microplastics found in the Great Lakes and fresh
water systems, information on New York City’s determination on the recyclability of
polystyrene, the State of Minnesota’s waste characterization study, and the HERC or Hennepin
Energy Recovery Center studies regarding emissions and ash. She reviewed the proposed goals
and potential policy options for Council consideration as well as proposed next steps.
Councilmember Brausen spoke in favor of the goal adopted by the City of Minneapolis with the
addition of a goal to minimize litter. He stated he was in favor of banning polystyrene food
packaging including cup lids and supported phasing in a ban on cup lids to give the industry time
to develop alternative products. He added he was okay with the proposed timeline and felt it was
important to have plenty of community outreach and education.
Councilmember Sanger stated she was in general agreement with the goals but felt it was
pointless to have a goal of increasing recyclability since there is no way to recycle this particular
product. She did not agree with requiring businesses to take these products back because people
will not make a separate trip to give back their product, which cannot be recycled anyway. She
agreed with a ban on cup lids and did not agree with allowing exceptions for hospitals and
nursing homes.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of August 10, 2015
Councilmember Lindberg stated he would like further conversation about the recyclability of the
product because it was his understanding from the expert panelists that recyclability does not
make economic sense but that there are solutions available.
Ms. Fisher stated that recyclability is an issue in this region and there is currently no hauler or
MRF (material recovery facility) that will take the product.
Councilmember Mavity concurred with the general goals but questioned whether they
encompassed everything that Council wants to accomplish. She stated she would not
recommend that staff spend more time on researching recyclability and agreed that no exceptions
should be allowed. She added she would like to have a draft policy available for public comment
so that people have something to react to during the listening session.
Councilmember Lindberg stated he would like to further discuss the staff resources needed to
enforce a ban on polystyrene and plastic bags as well as the City’s financial commitment. He
stated that while the cause is noble and worthy and accomplishes the City’s goals from an
environmental perspective, he questioned whether the City might see greater benefit in
something like expanded curbside recycling of organics.
Councilmember Spano referred to the Hennepin County statistic indicating that 30% of the waste
stream is food and approximately 12% of the waste stream is paper. He questioned whether the
City’s resources might be better spent in other places such as offering free curbside organics
recycling for a few months as a way to get people to sign up for this service.
Councilmember Sanger questioned whether a ban on polystyrene should state what businesses
should be using instead of polystyrene and perhaps encourage use of takeout containers that are
compostable or recyclable.
Councilmember Lindberg stated if the City is going to ban polystyrene for takeout containers and
suggest that compostable containers be used, it will be important to make sure residents have
access to recycling the material and urged Council to thoroughly give consideration to the entire
waste stream. He also asked about resources necessary to provide a means for residents to
compost in the parks and other public places.
Councilmember Mavity felt strongly that a ban on Styrofoam was the appropriate direction to
take and stated it might be helpful to have a three or five year plan in place that addresses these
issues so that staff is not overwhelmed trying to do everything at once.
Councilmember Hallfin stated the City wants to be a leader and felt this could be the next step in
being leaders. He stated he was in favor of banning polystyrene and if staff becomes
overburdened, they will need to tell Council so that Council can act accordingly. He also
supported the Minneapolis model regarding organics collection where all residents pay for it.
Council discussed staffing requirements and enforcement of a possible ordinance.
Councilmember Mavity felt there would be opportunities to partner with Hennepin County on a
ban and possibly share some staff costs.
It was the consensus of the City Council to agree with the proposed goals for banning
polystyrene in St. Louis Park. It was also the consensus of the City Council to pursue an
ordinance similar to the City of Minneapolis. It was also the consensus of the City Council to
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of August 10, 2015
direct staff to prepare a draft policy for consideration by Council prior to the listening session
and to have the draft policy available for public comment at the listening session. It was also the
consensus of the City Council that the ordinance would not include exemptions for hospitals or
nursing homes.
3. Excelsior Boulevard Traffic Discussion
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and provided historical background regarding the 2001
Excelsior Boulevard traffic study and staff’s work with SRF to review that document and
perform an updated audit in the context of future development in the corridor.
Ms. Heiser discussed the key considerations of the analysis including a review of existing traffic
operations at all corridor intersections and surrounding areas compared with the level of service
existing in 2000 and assumptions made in the redevelopment scenarios. She advised that the
audit found that the corridor is not achieving the levels previously anticipated, e.g., the area east
of Monterey during the PM peak is 1,300 vehicles fewer than anticipated in the earlier study.
She advised that average daily traffic was reviewed and there was either a decrease or no change
in all of the average daily trips (ADT) in the corridor compared with the earlier study. She stated
there are some pinch points such as the Park Commons intersection at Monterey and there was a
deliberate decision to leave the intersection the way it is today. She stated that concerns have
been expressed about cut-through traffic and a mitigation plan was prepared with recommended
mitigation measures but at this time, none of those triggers for mitigation have been met and is
the reason no actions have been taken. She advised that Excelsior Boulevard east of Highway
100 is robust enough to handle daily traffic and the area west of Highway 100 has been identified
as requiring mitigation to address congestion projected in 2030.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if information could be posted online that includes information on
the average subsidy per vehicle trip so that residents can see how much the City is subsidizing
whenever someone gets in their car.
Councilmember Sanger felt the City ought to be focusing on known problem areas and two of
the biggest areas of concern are Highway 100 where Excelsior and Wooddale come together and
the other area is Park Commons and Monterey.
Council continued its discussion regarding the previous traffic study and the Bridgewater
development proposal.
Ms. Heiser explained that staff reviewed the Monterey and P ark Commons intersection and
options include installing a traffic signal, however, a traffic signal at this intersection would be
230’ from Excelsior Boulevard and the intersection and northbound traffic on Monterey will
back up and block the intersection; as a result, staff is not recommending a traffic signal at this
location. She stated that another option is to allow a right-in/right-out only so traffic will not be
able to take a left turn out of the lot, which would resolve the issues at Trader Joe’s.
Councilmember Brausen stated that the traffic study reassured him that the City is not seeing the
level of congestion anticipated for this area except during rush hour and there is adequate
roadway capacity. He added he was assured that staff continues to address feasible solutions.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of August 10, 2015
Councilmember Mavity agreed and stated that system capacity is sufficient in general but there
are some pinch points at intersections that are causing issues and those are areas the City needs
to make sure it is spending time on before the Bridgewater project or other projects are approved.
4. Unimproved Alleys
Ms. Heiser presented the staff report and explained that the City has 16 miles of concrete alleys
and 5.2 miles of unimproved alleys, of which 2.36 miles are asphalt and 2.85 miles are gravel.
She discussed the City’s assessment policy and recommended that the assessment policy be
reviewed and updated.
Councilmember Sanger felt that the policy should be modified related to the City’s policy of
assessing people 30% even if they have no driveway or garage on the alley.
Councilmember Lindberg agreed and stated the impact of this policy is significant in Ward 1 and
Ward 3. He acknowledged the significant cost from the City’s perspective as well as from a
resident’s perspective and stated he would like to come up with some creative solutions that
lessen the financial burden on residents.
Ms. Heiser stated the City has very few unimproved streets and the City’s policy states if a street
is unimproved, it has to be reconstructed with curb and gutter. She stated the City’s assessment
policy is currently $20 per foot for residential and 100% for commercial and multifamily
properties. She advised that staff would be bringing this matter back to Council for policy
discussion in September.
It was the consensus of the majority of the City Council to direct staff to prepare an updated
assessment policy for Council consideration that encourages improved alleys and streets.
5. Wooddale Avenue & Highway 7 Temporary Interchange Modifications
Ms. Heiser presented the staff report.
Mr. Shamla advised that MnDOT prepared crash diagrams showing accident locations and that
MnDOT was in agreement with the recommendation of eliminating the left hand turns at each
off ramp of Highway 7 to Wooddale. He stated that the turning movement from southbound
Wooddale to eastbound Highway 7 would not be restricted due to the high traffic volumes at this
location.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to pursue the recommendations to
improve safety at this location.
Ms. Heiser reported that the ramp at Highway 100 southbound to Highway 7 is being shut down
because MnDOT is in the process of shifting traffic to the east side of the highway. She stated
that Barry Street is opening next week and the ramps will be opening on Minnetonka Boulevard
by Labor Day.
Mr. Shamla distributed information regarding the trail and explained that the Southwest LRT
Project Office has asked MnDOT to extend the center median so there is no disruption to
Highway 100 traffic during light rail construction. He stated the contractor has suggested that
the trail detour follow Beltline and use the pedestrian bridge over County Road 25 and Highway
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Title: Study Session Minutes of August 10, 2015
7 bridge in order to maintain a trail crossing of Highway 100 during construction of the regional
trail bridge.
Council agreed with the proposal put forth by the contractor related to the trail crossing.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Councilmember Spano requested a study session discussion regarding things the City can do on
social media to remind people about the businesses along Minnetonka Boulevard that remain
open during the Highway 100 project. He also asked if there was any interest in discussing tiny
houses at a future study session.
Councilmember Sanger suggested that the City hold a parade or kid bike parade when the
Minnetonka Boulevard bridge reopens.
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 9:17 p.m.
Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
6. Bass Lake Preserve Restoration Project Update
7. SWLRT Update
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 13, 2015
1. Call to Order
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen called the meeting to order at 4:21 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger.
Councilmembers absent: Steve Hallfin, Jeff Jacobs, and Jake Spano.
Staff present: City Clerk (Ms. Kennedy), and Administration Office Assistant (Ms. Midura).
2. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
2a. Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 11, 2015.
Resolution No. 15-117.
Ms. Kennedy presented the staff report and advised that the municipal primary election
was held on Tuesday, August 11, 2015, with 1,041 total ballots cast and a 3.5% turnout.
She reported that the candidates with the highest number of votes, Jake Spano and
Conrad Segal, should be certified as the candidates for Mayor on the general election
ballot.
It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Lindberg, to
adopt Resolution No. 15-117 Canvassing Election Returns of St. Louis Park – August 11,
2015 Municipal Primary Election.
The motion passed 4-0 (Councilmembers Hallfin, Jacobs, and Spano absent).
3. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Minutes: 3c
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 17, 2015
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg, Anne
Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Community Development (Mr.
Locke), Planning & Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr.
Hunt), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Redevelopment of Former Bally’s Site by Oppidan Investment Company
Mr. Walther presented the staff report and discussed the design changes made by the developer,
including removal of three units on the sixth floor along the Excelsior Boulevard frontage,
changing the stucco on the base of the building to stone, the addition of a staircase entryway into
the first level of parking, and the addition of glass on the exterior to add natural light to the
interior of the building. He presented several images of the project and introduced Mr. Joe Ryan
from Oppidan Investment Company.
Mr. Hunt explained that the proposed project merits the use of TIF with over $7 million of
extraordinary costs associated with redeveloping the site and the developer has applied for $2.6
million in TIF assistance in order to allow the project to reach financial feasibility.
Councilmember Mavity stated the revised design demonstrates that the developer was listening
to Council’s earlier concerns and felt the revised design was much better looking. She stated that
the City’s traffic system in this corridor has additional capacity but that there are problem points
at intersections that need to be addressed, e.g., the left turn from Excelsior Boulevard onto
Quentin. She requested further information about the shadow study.
Mr. Walther provided a brief explanation of the City’s shadow ordinance and presented a
drawing depicting actual shadow coverage of 29% on the Wolfe Park Condominiums building.
He pointed out that this drawing demonstrates shadowing on the worst day at the worst time of
the year, and shows that at 9:00 a.m. the Oppidan building casts a shadow that covers more than
50% of the wall of the condo building, but by 11:00 a.m., the shadow is cast on only a small
portion of the building and by afternoon, the condo building will have complete and direct access
to sunlight.
Councilmember Mavity stated she was comfortable moving forward with the project as revised
and was supportive of the request for TIF assistance.
Councilmember Sanger stated she would not support the revised plan or the request for TIF
assistance. She felt the developer had not made enough changes to the project and continued to
believe that the footprint of the proposed building is too big for the site, that there is no green
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3c) Page 2
Title: Special Study Session Minutes of August 17, 2015
space or space for trees, and the rental units are almost all one bedroom or are smaller units. She
continued to be concerned about availability of parking because the parking spaces being
counted on the street are already being heavily used by the residents at Wolfe Park Condos and
visitors to Excelsior & Grand. She also did not feel there was a need for another grocery store
within a couple blocks of Trader Joe’s and Byerly’s.
Councilmember Spano reminded Council that Wolfe Park is one of the nicest green spaces in the
City and is located less than half a block from this property. He reiterated his concerns about
traffic and stated the City will need to continue to watch the Princeton, Quentin and Park
Commons Drive intersections. He felt the City should remain engaged with the single family
detached homeowners in this area about traffic mitigation in the neighborhoods and suggested
Council review the 2002 traffic report again and consider changing the thresholds. He spoke in
favor of the project and the request for TIF assistance.
Councilmember Hallfin stated he appreciated the amount of work the developer put into
changing the design of the project. He referenced last week’s discussion regarding traffic on
Excelsior Boulevard and agreed it will be important for the City to continue to work on problem
areas in the corridor. He spoke in favor of the project and the request for TIF assistance.
Councilmember Lindberg felt this project on this site made sense and agreed it would be
important to continue to address the problem intersections in this corridor. He stated he was in
favor of the project and the request for TIF assistance.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen supported the project and the request for TIF assistance and stated that
this project provides many of the things that Council supports, i.e., job creation, mixed use
developments, housing options, stability in the retail corridor, public art, green design features,
and a good return on the City’s investment.
Councilmember Lindberg asked about the scorecard used by staff in the City’s TIF policy and
stated it seems that the City is always a bit off when it comes to unit size.
Mr. Hunt stated the policy was developed in 1997 and the scorecard accompanies the policy. He
agreed it is a challenge every time a project is scored and a project almost always gets an “F” on
the question about unit size.
Councilmember Mavity stated as the City begins the process of redoing the Comprehensive Plan
and obtaining resident input, the TIF policy and scorecard should be reviewed to make sure the
policy supports the City’s vision.
It was the consensus of the majority of the City Council to support Oppidan’s revised
redevelopment plans for the Bally block and to consider entering into a redevelopment contract
to reimburse the developer for qualified costs incurred in connection with the construction of
4900 Excelsior with tax increment generated by the project to make it financially feasible.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Tim Brausen, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Minutes: 3d
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 24, 2015
1. Call to Order
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Susan Sanger, and Jake
Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jacobs and Councilmembers Gregg Lindberg and Anne Mavity.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Principal Planner (Ms. McMonigal), and
Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
2. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
2a. SWLRT Funding Agreements
Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report and explained that the Subordinate Funding
Agreement formalizes the City’s commitment for the design and environmental work of
the Louisiana Station trail underpass in an amount up to $78,000 and the Master Funding
Agreement amendment reflects the City’s commitment to contribute $2 million to the
SWLRT project. She advised that the City Attorney has reviewed the agreements and
recommends that Council approve both documents.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to approve
an Amendment to the SWLRT Master Funding Agreement between the City and
Metropolitan Council to provide for the transfer of funds between the agencies.
The motion passed 4-0 (Mayor Jacobs and Councilmembers Lindberg and Mavity
absent).
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to approve
a Subordinate Funding Agreement between the City and Metropolitan Council for the
Louisiana Station Trail Underpass.
The motion passed 4-0 (Mayor Jacobs and Councilmembers Lindberg and Mavity
absent).
Ms. McMonigal stated that the public hearing on municipal consent is scheduled for
September 21, 2015, and the SWLRT Project Office will host an open house at City Hall
beginning at 6:30 p.m. and will also make a presentation at the public hearing.
3. Adjournment
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m.
___________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Tim Brausen, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Minutes: 3e
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 24, 2015
The meeting convened at 6:35 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Susan
Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs and Councilmember Gregg Lindberg.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Ms. Deno), Controller (Mr. Swanson), Finance Supervisor (Mr. Heintz),
Communications and Marketing Manager (Ms. Larson), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – September 8 and September 28, 2015
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed special study session agenda for September 8th and the
proposed study session agenda for September 28th. He reminded Council that the September 8th
meeting is on Tuesday due to Labor Day and that no meeting is scheduled on September 14th due
to Rosh Hashanah.
Councilmember Sanger requested a future study session discussion regarding tree preservation
and to consider an Ordinance similar to Edina’s Ordinance that states when a parcel is being
redeveloped, a property owner is permitted to cut down trees in the footprint of the new
construction and a 10’ perimeter around the building but is not permitted to clear cut the rest of
the trees on the property.
2. 2016 Budget, CIP and Utility Rates
Mr. Harmening introduced the topic.
Mr. Swanson presented the staff report and advised there are no levy limits in place for 2016 and
the City will receive $539,000 in LGA in 2016 and these dollars go into the Capital Replacement
Fund. He stated that wage and benefit adjustments are proposed for 2016 and the 2016 budget
includes staffing requests as summarized in the staff report.
Councilmember Spano asked about the revenue generated from the Park Nicollet pilot program.
Mr. Swanson replied that approximately $10,000 from the Park Nicollet pilot program has been
reflected in the budget.
Councilmember Spano asked about the role of the solid waste intern and whether the position
would include promotion of the City’s organics recycling program and felt this person or
someone else should be focused on that program, especially given the fact that food/organic
waste constitutes approximately 30% of the waste stream. He requested a study session
discussion regarding possible changes to the organics recycling program, e.g., moving to the
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3e) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of August 24, 2015
Minneapolis model or offering three months of organics recycling on a ward by ward basis as a
way to incent participation in the program.
Councilmember Sanger stated she was surprised by the number of new staffing requests and
asked how this compares with previous years.
Ms. Deno agreed to provide Council with historical data regarding staffing requests.
Councilmember Hallfin stated it would be helpful to know if the staff requests are wants versus
needs.
Mr. Harmening stated he felt there was merit in all of the staffing positions requested and
pointed out that the staffing requests do not represent his final recommendations and Council
will receive more specific recommendations from him regarding staffing after Council makes a
decision on the 2016 preliminary tax levy.
Councilmember Sanger stated she has always been skeptical that the Fire Department could
perform its duties under the Park Nicollet post discharge program without hiring any new
firefighters and questioned the benefit to the City of continuing that program if it only generates
$10,000 in revenue when the City has to hire additional firefighters. She requested an update on
the Park Nicollet pilot program at a future study session and also requested further information
about the staffing request for the Police Department.
Mr. Harmening stated the Police Department recently moved to five districts and the 5th district’s
“B” shift is currently being staffed by overtime and other means but there is no consistency in
staffing for this district, which continues to see significant redevelopment. He agreed to provide
Council with an update on the Park Nicollet post discharge program at a future study session and
noted that the request for one or more firefighters is driven by an increase in calls for service,
primarily medicals, and staff anticipates those calls for service will continue to increase given the
City’s aging population. He advised that Chief Koering has formed duty crews with the paid on
call staff where the firefighters now sign up for specific shifts so that they are complementing the
work of the firefighters and filling shifts where there is a need.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen spoke in favor of option 2 related to the Fire Department staffing
request.
Mr. Swanson reviewed significant expenditures in the 2016 budget and stated that the Solid
Waste Fund includes increased funding due to the organics recycling efforts. He stated that the
Operations and Recreation revenue decline of approximately $230,000 is related to the ice rinks
being redone and is being offset by one-time funding from the General Fund.
Mr. Harmening advised that pavement management in the Sorensen neighborhood was
scheduled in 2016 and the City is considering holding off on the pavement management in this
neighborhood until 2017 and moving the planned 2017 pavement management project to 2016.
He stated this was discussed with representatives of the Sorensen neighborhood who have agreed
with this schedule change in light of all the traffic disruptions with the Highway 100 project. He
stated that Engineering and Operations staff have been reviewing the condition of the City’s
infrastructure and if the City wants to maintain the street system at a road condition index of 70
as is the City’s policy, the City is going to have to invest more in infrastructure replacement.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3e) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of August 24, 2015
Mr. Swanson stated that the City’s housing values are beginning to rebound, specifically related
to apartments, condos and townhomes. He stated the City’s contribution to the fiscal disparities
pool decreased by $711,000 or approximately 18% and explained that the City’s valuations
declined less than other communities in previous years and now those communities are seeing a
significant increase in their commercial sector resulting in a decrease in the City’s tax rate. He
stated that staff has proposed a preliminary property tax levy increase of 6.5%, which would
allow the City to make some staffing adjustments and to put additional resources into funds such
as the Capital Replacement Fund to ensure the long-term sustainability of those funds. He
distributed information regarding a 4.56% property tax levy increase that shows a median value
home valued at $226,600 would see a decline in the City’s share of property taxes of
approximately $1.50; a 5.5% property tax levy increase would result in an increase of
approximately $7.00 in the City’s share of property taxes; and a 6.5% property tax levy increase
would result in an increase of approximately $16.00 in the City’s share of property taxes. He
stated the increase in the City’s property values means that if everything stayed the same
throughout the City, a person’s property taxes would have gone up approximately 10% but
because of the growth in the City’s tax base, the residential properties are seeing much less of an
increase and in some cases will see a decrease in the City’s share of their property taxes. He
reviewed the Utility Funds and stated that staff is recommending increases in all utility rates
except Solid Waste. He also discussed the impact of the rate increases and stated that a typical
homeowner would see an increase of approximately $50-$60 per year, adding that staff continues
to review the Utility Funds and will provide Council with specific recommendations in
September.
Councilmember Sanger felt the most important thing was the quality of services provided to the
community and stated she was okay with a 6.5% preliminary property tax levy increase.
Councilmember Spano pointed out that Council has always told staff that if additional staff is
needed, they need to inform Council, which they have done and stated he was okay with a 6.5%
preliminary property tax levy increase.
Councilmember Mavity stated she was okay with a 6.5% preliminary property tax levy increase
and urged staff to educate residents about the growth in the City’s tax base and reminding
residents that the impact of the property tax levy increase on the average homeowner was
minimal.
Councilmember Hallfin requested information about planned property tax increases from the
County and other taxing jurisdictions. He stated he was okay with a 6.5% preliminary property
tax levy increase.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen stated he was okay with a 6.5% preliminary property tax levy increase.
It was the consensus of the City Council to certify a preliminary property tax levy increase of
6.5% and to certify the maximum HRA levy amount for 2016. It was also the consensus of the
City Council to support the proposed utility rate adjustments for 2016. It was also the consensus
of the City Council that a special study session was not needed on September 8th unless Mayor
Jacobs and/or Councilmember Lindberg request an opportunity to further discuss the 2016
budget and preliminary property tax levy increase on September 8th.
3. Mayor, City Council and Economic Development Authority Compensation
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3e) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of August 24, 2015
Ms. Deno presented the staff report and stated the staff report provides historical salary
information and a summary of salaries for comparable cities and noted that the average of all
cities does not include compensation that a City Council might receive for a benefit such as
health insurance.
Councilmember Mavity stated she was in favor of tying any increase in compensation to the
same increase received by City staff and felt that represented a defensible and rational policy.
Councilmember Sanger agreed and felt that was a good benchmark to use. She asked why the
EDA salaries are separate from the City Council salaries and felt that having one salary amount
might be cleaner in terms of transparency and for comparison purposes. She added that she did
not want to own the iPad or have the iPad be part of the compensation package.
Councilmember Mavity felt that the iPads should be part of the compensation package with a
buyout price for the iPad when a Councilmember’s term is completed.
Councilmember Hallfin expressed concern that it might be perceived the City Council gave
themselves a $4,000 raise if the EDA salary is moved over to the City Council salary.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen supported the idea of allowing the City Council to keep their City-
issued iPads as part of their compensation package and stated that the value to the City in
reclaiming the iPads after four years is nominal given the rapid changes in technology.
Councilmember Spano stated that Council agendas were previously delivered by a CSO and the
use of iPads has saved the City money and he did not have a problem with allowing
Councilmembers to take their iPad with them when they leave office. He stated that the City
Council salaries are above the average of other peer cities and continued to believe there was no
need to increase the City Council salaries.
Councilmember Hallfin disagreed with Councilmember Spano and felt that Council’s pay should
be commensurate with the amount of work being done and he was okay with increasing Council
salaries equal with the salary increases of City staff.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen spoke in favor of a cost of living increase for Council.
Councilmember Mavity suggested a 2.5% salary increase for Council and the EDA this year and
a 2.5% salary increase next year.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen stated if staff received a 2% increase last year and a 2.5% increase in
2015, a 4.5% increase in Council pay would be reflective of what City staff has received.
Councilmembers Hallfin and Sanger agreed.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to follow-up with the City Attorney
regarding a 2.5% salary increase in 2016 and a 2.5% salary increase in 2017 and provide further
information to Council regarding ownership of the iPads.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 3e) Page 5
Title: Study Session Minutes of August 24, 2015
Mr. Harmening referred to his weekly email and the request from the Environment and
Sustainability Commission to participate in a training session by the University of Minnesota on
storm water management.
Councilmember Spano felt that the Environment and Sustainability Commission should attend
the training session and bring any recommendations to the City Council and that the training
session should be an opt-in for Councilmembers to attend if their schedule permits.
Mr. Harmening referenced the commentary in Sunday’s Star Tribune by the FairSkies Coalition
that discussed the impact of the 2030 airport plan and stated that he contacted Commissioner
Lisa Peilen and will be meeting with her. He stated that an informational meeting regarding the
MSP long-term comprehensive plan is scheduled on Thursday, August 27th, followed by a
comment period and the City might work with the City of Edina on submitting its comments.
Councilmember Spano stated he spoke with a representative from FairSkies who asked about
making a presentation to the City Council and they agreed to contact City staff.
Councilmember Sanger suggesting having a representative from the Metropolitan Airports
Commission attend any presentation from FairSkies.
Councilmember Mavity stated that the Southwest LRT budget reductions included landscaping,
public art, and other significant items and any available contingency funds cannot be used for
these items and requested that Council further discuss this and the impact on St. Louis Park.
Councilmember Sanger requested that staff provide Council with a list of the Southwest LRT
items that have been removed from St. Louis Park and the approximate cost.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen adjourned the meeting at 8:42 p.m.
Written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
4. Cable TV and Franchise Fee Trends
5. July 2015 Monthly Financial Report
6. 2015 Semi-Annual Housing Programs Activity Report
7. Homes Within Reach: City Funded Revolving Line of Credit to Assist w/
Acquisition and Rehab Costs of Affordable Homeownership Units
8. Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
9. The Shoreham PUD Amendment
10. Westwood Hills Nature Center Master Plan Update
11. Extension of Franchise Agreements with CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Tim Brausen, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Approval of City Disbursements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing City Disbursement Claims for the
period of July 25, 2015 through August 28, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to approve City disbursements in
accordance with Section 6.11 – Disbursements – How Made, of the City’s Charter?
SUMMARY: The Accounting Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the City
Council to review and approve. The attached reports show both City disbursements paid by
physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Review and approval of the information
follows the City’s Charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal
stewardship.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: City Disbursements
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
144.503RD LAIR SKATEPARK SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
144.50
1,105.19A-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,105.19
225.00AARON, JOSHUA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
866.14ABELSON, SHARON NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
866.14
1,802.65ABRA MN ST LOUIS PARK UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
1,802.65
1,248.00ABRAKADOODLEPRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,248.00
335.90ACME TOOLS PATCHING-PERMANENT EQUIPMENT PARTS
335.90
80,985.30ADVANCED DISPOSAL SERVICES SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE
45,090.76SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE
126,076.06
100.00ALDERSGATE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH ADMINISTRATION G & A RENTAL BUILDINGS
100.00
668.22ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC OPERATIONS REPAIRS
668.22
202.25ALL AMERICAN TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
202.25
21.43ALL AMERICAN TITLE CO WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
21.43
583.96ALL STAR SPORTS YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
583.96
294.00ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 2
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
294.00
130.00AMERICAN MESSAGING CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
130.00
84.50AMERICAN PRESSURE INC BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
84.50
518.00ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS OPERATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
518.00
2,290.70ANDERSEN INC, EARL INSTALLATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
2,290.70
504.22ANDERSEN, JENS EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
504.22
3,000.00ANDERSON, ELIZABETH ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
3,000.00
2,113.37APACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,113.37
609.00APPLE INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
609.00
223.75APWAENGINEERING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
223.75
251.21AQUILA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
251.21
10.00ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION ENVIRONMENTAL G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
10.00
197.42ARCPRINTING/REPRO SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
197.42
79.39ARDEN TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
79.39
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 3
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
3Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
767.14ASET SUPPLY AND PAPER INC SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
767.14
5,000.00ASHAFZADENKIAN, GHOLAMREZA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
5,000.00
3,000.00ASPEN LAWN SERVICE/SIPE'S ENTERPRISES IN ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
3,000.00
1,551.25ASPEN MILLS OPERATIONS UNIFORMS
246.38OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
1,797.63
590.19AT&T MOBILITY CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
590.19
390.47ATIR ELECTRIC CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
390.47
169.95AUTO ELECTRIC OF BLOOMINGTON INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
148.80GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
318.75
403.50AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
4,028.50WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
4,432.00
1,500.00B CUBED LLC ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,500.00
695.14BACHMANSPARK MAINTENANCE G & A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
200.00BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
895.14
222.40BACHMAN'S PLYMOUTH BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
222.40
3,711.21BADGER METER INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
3,711.21
1,780.00BAILEY NURSERIES INC TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENT
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 4
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
4Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,780.00
28.00BALCOS, ERIC SUMMER FIELDTRIPS PROGRAM REVENUE
28.00
363.98BARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
363.98
52.32BAROTT, CAL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
52.32
9,175.00BARR ENGINEERING CO STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
9,175.00
1,425.00BARTON SAND & GRAVEL CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
150.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
150.00PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,725.00
98.92BATTERIES + BULBS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
84.50REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
183.42
33.00BEBERGS LANDSCAPE SUPPLY WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
33.00
1,115.00BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS ARENA MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,115.00
475.00BECKER, DONALD GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
475.00
95.42BEDUHN, RYAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
95.42
395.00BELLPRO METAL FAB LLC AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
395.00
1,000.00BELTOWKSKY & JULIE THOMAS, ANDREW ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,000.00
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 5
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
5Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
37.50BERGERSON CASWELL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
37.50
140.00BERGUM, SUSAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
140.00
429.00BERNICK'S CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
429.00
505.40BERSCHEID, GARY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
505.40
86.47BEUGEN, ALLAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
86.47
800.00BIRDHOUSE HOLDINGS LLC PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
800.00
852.88BISEK, KATHRYN CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
852.88
12,680.00BLACKSTONE CONTRACTORS LLC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
12,680.00
334.39BLOOMFIELD & BOB KARASOV, HANNA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
334.39
14.99BLUE TARP FINANCIAL INC PATCHING-PERMANENT SMALL TOOLS
766.98BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT SMALL TOOLS
781.97
118.73BOETTCHER, SANDY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
118.73
36,192.50BOLTON & MENK INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
9,284.50STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
45,477.00
75.00BONE, CHRISTOPHER GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
75.00
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 6
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
6Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
3,240.00BORMANN CONSTRUCTION INC PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
8,820.00PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,250.00SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
14,310.00
150.00BOUCHIE, JOY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
150.00
772.91BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
772.91
299.45BOYER TRUCK PARTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
299.45
6,272.00BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
6,272.00
433.40BREKKE, ARLEN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
433.40
107.31BRINK, JUDY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
107.31
65.00BROADWAY AWARDS OPERATIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES
65.00
70.00BROOKLYN PARK RECREATION & PARKS FITNESS PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
70.00
771.21BROOKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
771.21
175.00BROUGHER, MICHELE GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
175.00
78.73BRUNSWICK GABLES ASSN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
78.73
887.67BURNET TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
887.67
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 7
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
7Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
112.97CAIN, KAREN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
112.97
11,500.00CALGON CARBON CORP REILLY BUDGET CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY
11,500.00
39.24CAMDEN INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY TREE DISEASE PRIVATE GENERAL SUPPLIES
39.24
13,781.05CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
165.00ENGINEERING G & A LEGAL SERVICES
495.00CABLE TV G & A LEGAL SERVICES
610.50STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL SERVICES
66.00SOLID WASTE G&A LEGAL SERVICES
15,117.55
971.49CARTEGRAPH SYSTEMS INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
971.49
918.00CARTER, JAMES SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
918.00
105.74CARTNEY, COLBY INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
105.74
2,087.77CASTANEDA-PEDERSON, DAN IT G & A TRAINING
2,087.77
163.07CATON, JOHN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
163.07
20,502.26CDW GOVERNMENT INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
20.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
20,522.26
4,287.75CENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT DISCOUNT LOAN PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,675.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
25,000.00TRANSFORMATION LOAN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,900.00LIVE WHERE YOU WORK PRGM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
33,862.75
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 8
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
8Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,108.44CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS
3,204.30WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
94.38REILLY G & A HEATING GAS
79.56SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
129.90SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
753.87PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS
102.16WESTWOOD G & A HEATING GAS
81.95NATURALIST PROGRAMMER HEATING GAS
5,554.56
2,635.32CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES INC FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS
16,398.08REC CENTER BUILDING HEATING GAS
19,033.40
66.00CENTRAIREINSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICAL
66.00
10,250.00CENTRAL PENSION FUND EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S OTHER RETIREMENT
10,250.00
261.60CENTURY LINK CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
261.60
284.00CENTURY PLUMBING INC INSPECTIONS G & A PLUMBING
284.00
40.00CHAMPION PLUMBING INSPECTIONS G & A PLUMBING
40.00
165.00CHARNEY, ADAM YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUE
165.00
75.00CHRISTENSON, DOLORES GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
75.00
216.20CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
99.51FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
829.66WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
205.29AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
136.86AQUATIC PARK BUDGET CONCESSION SUPPLIES
428.04VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 9
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
9Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,915.56
1,557.93CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,265.95GENERAL FUND G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
6.99ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
113.39ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
123.34ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
765.00ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAINING
39.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
170.07ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
9.22HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES
42.80HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
55.00HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
1,852.38HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
249.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING
323.82HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE
110.56HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE GENERAL SUPPLIES
904.53COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
632.38COMM & MARKETING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
729.50IT G & A TRAINING
669.13ASSESSING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
505.00FINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
749.00FINANCE G & A TRAINING
50.00FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
765.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING
522.24FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
8.54POLICE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
216.47POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
656.19POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
30.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
76.80POLICE G & A POSTAGE
525.00-POLICE G & A TRAINING
253.66POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
52.87POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE
367.71NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
38.61SUPPORT SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIES
67.92RANGETRAINING
78.96ERUOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,234.23ANIMAL CONTROL POLICE EQUIPMENT
778.00E-911 PROGRAM TRAINING
19.30OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 10
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
10Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
117.74OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
1,052.34OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
2,357.35OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
600.01OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS
143.24OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING
664.00OPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
77.71OPERATIONSTRAINING
1,837.22OPERATIONSSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
771.61OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
36.50OPERATIONSBANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
1,119.93INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
20.25INSPECTIONS G & A MEETING EXPENSE
175.02PUBLIC WORKS G & A MEETING EXPENSE
24.66ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
39.00CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
88.30FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION MEETING EXPENSE
449.30TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
510.92TV PRODUCTION NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT
765.00HOUSING REHAB G & A TRAINING
400.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,400.00WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING
618.82SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
295.00SOLID WASTE G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
12.19STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
83.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
885.95ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,545.88ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
83.96SOFTBALLGENERAL SUPPLIES
73.17SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL SUPPLIES
40.00HOLIDAY PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
335.66SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES
171.95SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS TRAINING
441.75SUMMER FIELDTRIPS GENERAL SUPPLIES
256.93SUMMER FIELDTRIPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
109.10PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
48.27PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
72.15PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
174.51ENVIRONMENTAL G & A TRAINING
229.83WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
80.27WESTWOOD G & A SMALL TOOLS
15.06HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 11
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
11Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
129.52JUNIOR NATURALISTS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
595.00ARENA MAINTENANCE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
927.10AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
302.32AQUATIC PARK BUDGET CONCESSION SUPPLIES
1,026.00AQUATIC PARK BUDGET TRAINING
15.10CONCESSIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
15.38VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
36,799.46
1,688.61COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
1,688.61
17,847.34COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES
17,847.34
954.00COLONIAL STONE CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
954.00
63.25COMCASTOPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
18.11OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
185.70WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
18.10BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
285.16
690.73COMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY SEALCOAT PREPARATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
7,584.58PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
5,344.11PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
10,564.18WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
24,183.60
444.49COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
444.49
6,953.76COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP SUB HENN EMERGENCY REPAIR GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6,953.76
172.00COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT FUND MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
172.00
180.30CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
180.30
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 12
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
12Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
8,750.00CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8,750.00
149.90COUCH, GARY WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
149.90
30,870.00COURT SURFACES & REPAIR PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
30,870.00
13,506.00COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
13,506.00
167.46COX, COLIN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
167.46
113.85CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
113.85
2,600.00CROSSTOWN MECHANICAL INC GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,600.00
18.10CROWN MARKING INC IT G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
18.10
378.31CUB FOODS POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES
378.31
765.00CURRAN-MOORE, KIM SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
765.00
1,535.41CUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES SSD 1 G&A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
5,577.50SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
242.51SSD 2 G&A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
2,753.00SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
241.15SSD 3 G&A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
1,599.50SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,941.25SSD #4 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,849.53SSD #5 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
183.48SSD #6 G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
4,323.04SSD #6 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 13
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
13Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
20,246.37
1,686.82CUSTOM REFRIGERATION INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,686.82
319.76DALCO ENTERPRISES INC REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
319.76
2,000.00DAMAR INVESTMENTS ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
2,000.00
32.59DEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
36.80open code EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
36.08GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
105.47
35,910.00DECORATIVE PAVEMENT MARKING SSD 3 BALANCE SHEET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
35,910.00
600.00DEGROOT, ROBERT PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
600.00
755.83DELEGARD TOOL CO GENERAL REPAIR SMALL TOOLS
755.83
6,829.91DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
6,829.91
107.93DESENS, HELEN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
107.93
293.25DEX MEDIA EAST LLC ENTERPRISE G & A ADVERTISING
293.25
945.00DISCOUNT STEEL INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
945.00
60.00DISE, SHEILA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
60.00
4,215.00DJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 14
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
14Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
295.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
235.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
365.55REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
5,110.55
78,290.00DJ KRANZ CO INC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
78,290.00
7,894.03DO-GOOD.BIZ INC COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE
688.42NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH POSTAGE
56.13ENGINEERING G & A POSTAGE
858.95ENGINEERING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
9,497.53
40.00DRIVEN ELECTRIC INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
40.00
309.39DUBE, JIM INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
309.39
114.50DWYER, TERRY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
114.50
114.94EASTBOURNE, CHERYL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
114.94
1,635.26ECM PUBLISHERS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES
61.44PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT LEGAL NOTICES
106.12STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
106.12PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A LEGAL NOTICES
77.27WATER UTILITY G&A LEGAL NOTICES
1,986.21
525.00EDEN PRAIRIE - FIRE DEPT, CITY OF OPERATIONS TRAINING
525.00
342.03EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
342.03
1,217.92EDINA REALTY TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
1,217.92
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 15
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
15Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
509.92EGAN COMPANIES INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
3,128.33WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
3,638.25
2,375.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ESCROWS
2,375.00
12,952.21ELECTRIC PUMP INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
12,952.21
84.86ELECTRONIC CENTER GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
84.86
30.04EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
30.04
36,153.76EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
36,153.76
390.00EMPIREHOUSE INC GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
390.00
337.50EMPLOYEE STRATEGIES INC ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
450.00ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAINING
6,000.00HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
6,787.50
794.43ENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT & SERVICES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
794.43
1,474.00EPIC SECURITY PROFESSIONALS INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,474.00
495.00ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
495.00
525.00EWING, SANDRA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
525.00
350.16EXECUTIVE TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 16
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
16Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
350.16
587.08FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
126.60GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
713.68
225.00FASHINGBAUER, CLAUDIA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
166.40FASTENAL COMPANY OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
166.40
262.50FEBEL, MAUREEN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.50
81.65FECHNER, MARTY ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
81.65
55.25FEDEXHUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
55.25
4,876.85FERGUSON WATERWORKS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
4,876.85
518.90FERRELLGASICE RESURFACER MOTOR FUELS
518.90
5,024.25FIRE CATT LLC OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
5,024.25
1,761.50FIRE SAFETY USA INC OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING
45.00OPERATIONSREPAIRS
1,806.50
130.02FIRST AMERICAN TITLE CO WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
130.02
412.50FISCHER BROS LLC UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
610.00AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,022.50
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 17
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
17Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
925.99FISCHER MINING LLC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
925.99
525.00FISCHLER & ASSOCIATES PA POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
525.00
69.60FLARE HEATING & AIR INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICAL
69.60
202.50FLEX COMPENSATION INC EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
202.50
221.82FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
221.82
14.93FORCE AMERICA INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
14.93
1,126.55FORESTRY SUPPLIERS INC REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,126.55
2,807.50FOWLER ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
2,807.50
5,300.00FRANKLIN PLUMBING, BEN SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
5,300.00
95.08FREDENBURG, DAVID REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
95.08
12.98FREEDMAN, BREANNA HUMAN RIGHTS MEETING EXPENSE
40.73NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT MEETING EXPENSE
53.71
10,000.00FRIENDS OF THE ARTS NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
10,000.00
337.47FRONTIER AG & TURF UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
337.47
849.70GAME TIME PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 18
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
18Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
849.70
405.75GARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
402.75ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
808.50
1,287.75GHIZONI, DAVE SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,287.75
73.50GLENNON, CAITLIN JUNIOR NATURALISTS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
73.50
676.16GLOBAL CLOSING & TITLE SERVICE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
676.16
4,048.96GLTC PREMIUM PAYMENTS EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S LONG TERM CARE INSUR
4,048.96
54.00GOLDMARKINSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
54.00
6,513.00GOODPOINTE TECHNOLOGY INC PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
6,513.00
1,421.10GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,421.10
138.60GRAINGER INC, WW BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
138.60
4,900.00GRANICUS INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
4,900.00
2,921.13GRANITE LEDGE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,842.29CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8,763.42
16,500.00GREAT RIVER GREENING STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
16,500.00
661.16GREEN HORIZONS WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 19
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
19Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
661.16
81.94GROSS, CHARLES REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81.94
465.36GROUP HEALTH INC - WORKSITE EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCE
465.36
196.30GUSEK, TODD WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
196.30
436.34HACH CO WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
436.34
175.00HALSTEN, BEN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
175.00
1,810.50HAMILTON, MIKE SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,810.50
2,800.00HAMLINE UNIVERSITY TRAINING SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
2,800.00
35.00HANSEN, CALEB INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
35.00
10,068.27HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
7,294.12AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,881.18AQUATIC PARK G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
19,243.57
3,051.00HCI CHEMTEC INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
3,051.00
5,715.00HEALTHPARTNERSHUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
5,715.00
334.00HEDBERG SUPPLY STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
334.00
212.50HEITHECKER, ERIC GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 20
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
20Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
212.50
600.00HELLO! BOOKING INC PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
600.00
26.57HEMANN, COTY FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
26.57
1,963.50HENDERSON, TRACY SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,963.50
225.00HENNEN, KYLE GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
225.00
54.00HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENT & REAL ESTATE ASSESSING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
54.00
64.80HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER COMMUNITY SUPPORT RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
1,100.00IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
1,968.47POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
12,359.52POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICE
1,367.10OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
93,120.88CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,002.13WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,002.13SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,002.13STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
9,006.41PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
722.98PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
128,716.55
62,935.78HENRICKSEN PSG MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
62,935.78
90.45HESS, THOMAS REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
90.45
88.82HICKS, JEAN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
88.82
3,695.00HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
3,925.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 21
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
21Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
7,620.00
86.52HIPP, EARL REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
86.52
765.00HIT RESULTS FITNESS LLC OPERATIONS TRAINING
765.00
14.00HITCHCOCK, SYLVIA SUMMER FIELDTRIPS PROGRAM REVENUE
14.00
27.75HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
304.55FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
3.97PUBLIC WORKS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
84.84PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
69.97PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SMALL TOOLS
13.39ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
3.97ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
39.81PAINTINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
299.76WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
72.32PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
102.97PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
5.41PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
13.76PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
69.07PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
325.80BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS GENERAL SUPPLIES
55.26BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
130.02REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
362.69ARENA MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,985.31
9.29HOME TITLE INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
9.29
10,000.00HOPKINS, CITY OF ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
10,000.00
150.08HOPPE, MARK ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
150.08
306.00HORDYK, EVAN SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 22
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
22Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
306.00
388.40HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
388.40
200.00HORTON, MICHAEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
200.00
500.00HOWES, JENNIFER KICKBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
500.00
100.00HOWES, KRISTINE VOLLEYBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
50.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
204.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
354.00
1,200.00HRGREENTECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT
1,200.00
1,407.00I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
1,407.00
2,435.00I/O SOLUTIONS INC HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
2,435.00
19.00IATNVEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
19.00
600.00ICCINSPECTIONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
600.00
395.00ICE SKATING INST AMERICA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
395.00
833.89IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
833.89SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
833.88SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
833.88STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
3,335.54
204.59INDELCOWATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 23
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
23Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
102.69IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
307.28
590.00INDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
590.00
1,980.00INGINA LLC PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,980.00
2,282.01INTEGRA TELECOM IT G & A TELEPHONE
2,282.01
830.00INTOXIMETERS INC POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
830.00
310.07INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
528.75PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
838.82
202.22I-STATE TRUCK CENTER GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
202.22
112.32J & F REDDY RENTS GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
112.32
7,450.00JACKSON DEAN CONSTRUCTION ESCROWS COSTCO WHOLESALE
7,450.00
39.95JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
2,758.55OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING
2,798.50
10.23JERRY'S HARDWARE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
19.73POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
36.26DAMAGE REPAIR SMALL TOOLS
12.68INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
59.93WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
21.26PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
75.48BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS GENERAL SUPPLIES
235.57
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 24
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
24Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
287.52JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
287.52
104.56JOHNSON, JAMES REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
104.56
2,000.00JOHNSON, LAUREN ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
2,000.00
250.00JOHNSON, MATTHEW GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
250.00
300.00JOHNSON, SUSAN VOLLEYBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
400.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
700.00
487.50JURISZ, DAVID GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
487.50
110.17KAMP, JEFF WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
110.17
240.00KEEPRS INC POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
240.00
503.08KELLER, JASMINE Z EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
503.08
55.50KENNEDY & GRAVEN ESCROWS
55.50
83.67KENT, RALEIGH REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
83.67
198.06KEYSTONEGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
198.06
9,923.00KEYSTONE COMPENSATION GROUP LLC HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
9,923.00
1,431.20KIDS TEAM TENNIS LLC TENNIS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 25
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
25Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,431.20
781.00-KILLMER ELECTRIC CO INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
15,620.00DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,445.02PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
16,284.02
16,472.37KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
16,472.37
50.00KIRIHARA, DEBORAH & JAY INSPECTIONS G & A DOGS
50.00
2,600.00KLM ENGINEERING INC.WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
2,600.00
19.14KOCH, LUKE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
19.14
216.61KRISHEF, ROBT WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
216.61
145.00KROGAN, MIKE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
145.00
517.28KRUELLE, BRYAN EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
517.28
885.72KRUGE-AIR INC BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
885.72
30.00KUBE, CLARK INSPECTIONS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
30.00
204.00KUBES, JON SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
204.00
3,012.00KUSTOM SIGNALS INC MUNICIPAL BLDG POLICE EQUIPMENT
3,012.00
44.00LAKES GAS CO PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 26
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
26Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
44.00
62.00LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
62.00
131.63LAND TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
131.63
3,000.00LANDY, LAURA BETH ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
3,000.00
1,365.23LARSON, JH CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
1,365.23
2,519.05LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
2,519.05
6,125.70LAWGISTIC PARTNERS POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
6,125.70
51.63LAWSON PRODUCTS INC GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
51.63
10,185.65LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A League of MN Cities dept'l exp
10,185.65
113,134.25LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A League of MN Cities dept'l exp
3,465.00UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
116,599.25
437.50LEHMAN, JESSICA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
437.50
296.63LEICA GEOSYSTEMS INC ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
296.63
1,613.46LIBERTY ENVELOPE COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
1,613.46
3,557.90LINAEMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY
3,557.90
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 27
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
27Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
200.00LISEC, TOM POLICE G & A TRAINING
200.00
50.99LITIN PAPER, PACKAGING & CONVERTING CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
50.99
15.00LOCKGUARD INC REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
182.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
197.00
5,594.22LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES
5,594.22
1,383.54LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,383.54
32,941.00LOGISIT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES
9,478.25TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
42,419.25
3,397.86LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
3,397.86
665.00LYNCH CAMPS, INC ATHLETIC CAMPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
665.00
60.00MAAPTENGINEERING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
60.00
770.47MACQUEEN EQUIP CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
770.47
59.00MAGINNIS, AUSTIN INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICAL
59.00
340.00MALONE, DANIEL ATHLETIC CAMPS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
340.00
79.03MANNING, CATHERINE REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
79.03
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 28
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
28Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
25,289.24MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
25,289.24
300.00MARSHALL, ADAM PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
300.00
433.60MARTENS, AFTON JOINT COMM POLICE PARTNERSHIP TRAINING
433.60
12,000.00MASTER TECHNOLOGY GROUP TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
12,000.00
2,500.00MATHWIG, TROY ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
2,500.00
1,500.00MCCHESNEY, CHARLIE SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,500.00
5.99MCCONNELL, BECKY WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
32.55SUMMER GRADE 2-3 GENERAL SUPPLIES
38.54
5,248.35-MCCROSSAN INC, C S STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
262,417.43CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
100.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
257,269.08
113.20MCNEIL, ABBY POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
113.20
10,995.00MDH PROPERTIES LLC ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
10,995.00
239.70MENARDSPARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
126.65WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
172.32WESTWOOD G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
538.67
15,955.63METHODIST HOSPITAL SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
15,955.63
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 29
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
29Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
245.79METRO STONEWORKS UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
245.79
7,455.00METROPOLITAN COUNCIL INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
307,654.25SEWER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES
315,109.25
150.00MEUWISSEN, GRIFFIN VOLLEYBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
150.00
149.95MICRO CENTER WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
149.95
44,364.00MICROWAVE NETWORKS E-911 PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
44,364.00
6,995.00MID AMERICA BUSINESS SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
6,995.00
5,520.00MIDWEST GROUNDCOVER PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
4,500.00PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIES
4,500.00PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
14,520.00
14,046.60MINGER CONSTRUCTION INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
32,882.00CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
46,928.60
1,041.74MINIKAHDA VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,041.74
1,308.60MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,308.60
151.24MINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITS
151.24
120.00MINNESOTA BUREAU CRIMINAL APPREHENSION POLICE G & A TRAINING
180.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAINING
300.00
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 30
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
30Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
147.66MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
147.66
50.00MINNESOTA DEPT HEALTH REILLY BUDGET LICENSES
50.00
152.00MINNESOTA EXTERIORS INC INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
152.00
550.00MINNESOTA ICE ARENA MGRS ASSOC ARENA MAINTENANCE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
550.00
250.00MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOC WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
250.00
275.00MINNESOTA STATE FIRE CHIEFS ASSOC. OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
275.00
990.00MINNESOTA TWINS HUMAN RESOURCES CITE
990.00
326.20MINUTEMAN PRESS IT G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
326.20
25.00MNAPAHUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
25.00
98.21MOMMSEN, KATHY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
98.21
1,500.00MORN, DARLENE ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,500.00
3,025.00MORRISON & ASSOCIATES INC HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
3,025.00
7,243.43MOSS & BARNETT FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
7,243.43
182,553.60MOTOROLAPOLICE & FIRE PENSION G&A OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 31
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
31Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
182,553.60
1,125.00MPCAPARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,125.00
133.86MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
133.86
34,272.14MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
34,272.14
275.00NAGENGAST DOORS LLC, JOHN REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
275.00
212.50NAMMACHER, MARK GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
212.50
3,741.90NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
6.64GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
39.81PATCHING-PERMANENT SMALL TOOLS
46.46ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
63.86WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
61.18PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
21.48REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT PARTS
226.03GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
4,207.36
145.69NATIONS TITLE AGENCY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
145.69
200.00NATIVE PLANT NURSERY INC BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS GENERAL SUPPLIES
160.00BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
360.00
379.40ND CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS
379.40
1,800.00NDI TECHNOLOGIES INC POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,800.00
91.48NELSON, MARK OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 32
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
32Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
91.48
3,500.00NGUYEN, MINH QUANG ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
3,500.00
2,880.00NORTH STAR CONSTRUCTION WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
2,880.00
2,962.00NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE REILLY BUDGET OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
2,962.00
165.52NORTHERN AIRE SWIMMING POOLS AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
19.50AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
185.02
2,394.92NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
246.75SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
378.16MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
3,019.83
25.00NORTHSTAR CHAPTER APA HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
25.00
80.87NOSOW, EDITA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
80.87
28,815.56NYSTROM PUBLISHING COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
28,815.56
804.14OAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
804.14
25.52OFFICE DEPOT ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
84.87ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
28.99HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES
85.38COMM & MARKETING G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
21.93COMM DEV G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
222.46POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
59.98POLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES
361.96COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL OFFICE SUPPLIES
4.34COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 33
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
33Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
196.50INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
62.03PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
718.24ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
97.23WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
1,969.43
OFFICE TEAM PUBLIC WORKS G & A SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES
571.99PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
571.99
100.00OLESEN, SARA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
100.00
7,458.34OLS RESTORATION INC SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
7,458.33SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
7,458.33SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
22,375.00
12.74OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
28.43UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
229.37PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
270.54
876.88OMAHA PAPER COMPANY INC REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
876.88
204.00ON SITE SANITATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,063.00PORTABLE TOILETS/FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
99.50OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
127.00WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,493.50
153.25OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
153.25
150.31PAINTERS GEAR INC DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
150.31
3,000.00PARAMOUNT INV GROUP ESCROWS GENERAL
3,000.00
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 34
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
34Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
67,188.30-PARK CONSTRUCTION CO STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
1,343,766.10CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,276,577.80
118.40PARK JEEP GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
118.40
400.00PARK THEATER COMPANY PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
400.00
1,571.73-PARROTT CONTRACTING INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
31,434.50CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
29,862.77
342.81PARSONS ELECTRIC CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
13,513.00WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
6,951.25TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
20,807.06
46.43PARTNERS TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
46.43
64.57PATRICK, MICHEAL WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
64.57
350.00PATRIOT 2000 INC PATCHING-PERMANENT SMALL TOOLS
350.00
6,325.00PERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
493.75WATER UTILITY G&A ADVERTISING
493.75SOLID WASTE G&A ADVERTISING
987.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ADVERTISING
8,300.00
40.75PETTY CASH GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
19.60POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGE
7.00NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH TRAVEL/MEETINGS
10.45ASSET MANAGEMENT MEETING EXPENSE
15.93ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
5.13WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
40.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 35
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
35Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
2.02WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
8.03WATER UTILITY G&A MEETING EXPENSE
17.98SOLID WASTE G&A MEETING EXPENSE
72.77WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
115.75VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES
355.41
28.06PETTY CASH - WWNC WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
11.50WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
20.56SUMMER PRE/K GENERAL SUPPLIES
12.71SUMMER GRADE 6-8 GENERAL SUPPLIES
7.98OTHER SUMMER CAMPS GENERAL SUPPLIES
80.81
75.00PHILIP'S TREE CARE INC SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
357.14BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
432.14
267.93PLASTIC BAGMART GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY
267.93
257.82POPP.COM INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONE
257.82
90.00POST BOARD PATROL LICENSES
90.00
10,000.00POSTMASTERRESIDENTIAL/BUSINESS COMMUNIC POSTAGE
10,000.00
1,073.11PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,073.11
149.76PRECISE MRM LLC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TELEPHONE
149.75WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
149.76SEWER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
149.76STORM WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
599.03
7,918.00PRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
7,918.00
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 36
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
36Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
190.00PRINTERS SERVICE INC ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
190.00
510.00PRO AUTO DETAILING PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
510.00
24.16PRO TITLE OF MN LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
24.16
250.00PROS OF THE ROPE LLC HEALTH IN THE PARK INITIATIVE TRAVEL/MEETINGS
250.00
63.50PUMP & METER SERVICE BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
63.50
561.45Q3 CONTRACTING PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
778.00SEALCOAT PREPARATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
6,138.73WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
7,478.18
57.95QUEST ENGINEERING INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
57.95
131.38QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGE
131.38
528.83R & R SPECIALTIES ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
528.83
1,241.10RAINBOW TREECARE TREE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
260.00TREE DISEASE PUBLIC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
450.00BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,951.10
3,313.79RANDY'S SANITATION INC FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
549.03PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
645.22PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
1,422.04REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
5,930.08
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 37
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
37Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
83.77RAYNOR, PETER REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
83.77
139.49RED WING SHOE STORE PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
139.49
86.34REGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS LLC POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
48.48POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
134.82
222.80REINHOLD, GINA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
222.80
799.29REMAX CONSULTANTS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
799.29
195.00REPTILE & AMPHIBIAN DISCOVERY ZOO PLAYGROUNDS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
195.00
75.00RIBEIRO, ANA C B FREIRE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
75.00
3,712.30RICOH USA INC IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
3,712.30
94.81RIGID HITCH INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
94.81
81.94ROEHLKEPARTAIN, JOLENE & GENE REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
81.94
714.00ROGERS, KYLE SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
714.00
241.50SABES JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER GROUP ADMISSION PROGRAM REVENUE
241.50
39.95SAFELITE FULFILLMENT INC GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
39.95
97.27SAM'S CLUB OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 38
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
38Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
54.40OPERATIONSSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
53.59PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
30.22ORGANIZED REC G & A INTEREST/FINANCE CHARGES
1,188.26PERFORMING ARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES
78.07SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES
133.11PLAYGROUNDSGENERAL SUPPLIES
22.44SUMMER FIELDTRIPS GENERAL SUPPLIES
17.96FACILITY ROOM RENTAL CONCESSION SUPPLIES
2,805.40CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIES
4,480.72
150.00SANSBY DESIGN, SCOTT PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
150.00
85.00SAURER, MARTI INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
85.00
15,112.00SAVATREETREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
15,112.00
700.05SCAN AIR FILTER INC REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
686.68REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,386.73
135.40SCHAAKE COMPANY, AJ HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
135.40
2,885.00SCHMITZ CONSTRUCTION CO LLC, J P WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
2,885.00
249.55SCHOMER, KELLEY ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
249.55
708.00SCHRAMM, HOLLY FITNESS PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
708.00
400.00SCIENCE MUSEUM MINNESOTA ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABILITY GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
400.00
92.18SCOTT, LOIS REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
92.18
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 39
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
39Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
300.00SEELEY, MARK ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABILITY GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
300.00
8,221.38SEHSTREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
7,180.45STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
15,401.83
2,500.00SHARPE, TED ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
2,500.00
1,141.60SHERWIN WILLIAMS PAINTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,141.60
59.33SHRED-IT USA MINNEAPOLIS ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
810.00IT G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
729.58FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
113.96POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
11.40INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
11.40WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,735.67
113.00SIGN PRODUCERS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
113.00
1,517.50SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC AQUATIC PARK BUDGET BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
1,517.50
487.50SIMONETTI, DOMINIC GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
487.50
805.00SIR LINES-A-LOT WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CENTER OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
805.00
68.04SKALLET, DAVID INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
362.63INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING
430.67
877.20SKELLY, GABRIEL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
877.20
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 40
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
40Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
1,524.90SLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUES
1,524.90
100.00SMITH, CARY S OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
100.00
75.00SMITH, ELLEN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
75.00
373.57SNYDER ELECTRIC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
373.57
1,917.78SPRINTIT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONS
1,917.78
730.73SPS COMPANIES INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
63.37PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
2,105.33REC CENTER BUILDING BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
2,899.43
3,820.87SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC ESCROWS GENERAL
3,820.87
2,380.00ST LOUIS PARK FAST PITCH ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,380.00
28,337.44ST LOUIS PARK HOUSING AUTHORITY CDBG BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
28,337.44
1,156.00ST PAUL, CITY OF POLICE G & A TRAINING
720.61PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
1,876.61
40.00STANDARD HEATING & A/C INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICAL
40.00
4,621.17-STANDARD SIDEWALK INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
92,423.37CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
87,802.20
458.00STANDARD SPRING GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 41
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
41Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
458.00
183.30STAR TRIBUNE ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
183.30
306.00STEARNS, DAVID SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
306.00
899.52STEBLAY, ANTHONY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
899.52
5,000.00STEVENS DRILLING & ENVIRONMENTAL ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC
5,000.00
65,799.05STEVENS ENGINEERS INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
65,799.05
162.87STREICHER'S POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
129.99OPERATIONSUNIFORMS
199.99VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SMALL TOOLS
492.85
295.00STUMPF, JOHN TREE MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
295.00
177.80SULLIVAN, LOIS REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
177.80
9,086.50SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
9,086.50
.62SUNDBERG AMERICA GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
.62
1,969.71SUNNYSIDE GARDENS CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
1,969.71
1,332.13-SUNRAM CONSTRUCTION INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
26,642.50CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
25,310.37
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 42
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
42Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
589.65SWANSON, MITCH EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITION
589.65
254.73SWARTS, ANNA PLAYGROUNDS MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
254.73
11,114.56SWEEN COMPANY, EA CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
11,114.56
907.28SWEETSER, JEFF WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
907.28
390.00TASER TRAINING ACADEMY POLICE G & A TRAINING
390.00
206.25TERMINAL SUPPLY CO GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
206.25
74.50TERMINIX INT BRICK HOUSE (1324)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
74.50WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
105.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
254.00
397.90TERRY, MATT PLAYGROUNDS MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
397.90
12.00TEXA TONKA TAILORING OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
12.00
40.00THATE, KELLY YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUE
40.00
17,969.76-THOMAS & SONS CONST INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGE
359,395.16CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
341,425.40
484.50THOMPSON, JAMES SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
484.50
145.87THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
145.87
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 43
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
43Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
141.00TIES, JILL INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
141.00
1,317.25TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,317.25
41.12TITLE SMART WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
41.12
115.45TITLE SMART INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
115.45
49.72TITLESMART INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
49.72
3,043.48TKDAWATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
3,043.48
31.50TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
31.50
490.02TRADEMARK TITLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
490.02
394.00TRAFFIC CONTROL CORP RELAMPING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
394.00
510.00TRAUTMANN, JOHN SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
510.00
7,698.03TREE TRUST CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,747.50TREE DISEASE PRIVATE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
10,445.53
2,670.12TRI STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
2,670.12
487.50TRONSON, SCOTT GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
487.50
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 44
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
44Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
65.00TWIN CITY EDM & MFG INC AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
65.00
1,870.10TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
245.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
2,115.10
48.40TWIN CITY HARDWARE PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
48.40
2,932.00UHL CO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,412.00FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
18,000.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
22,344.00
455.99UNIFORMS UNLIMITED (PD)SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
887.49SUPERVISORYOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
1,879.98PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
254.49COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICER OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
3,477.95
316.00UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAY
316.00
175.00UNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
175.00
100.74UNZE, EILEEN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
100.74
373.41USA BLUE BOOK WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER
177.61WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
81.02SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
632.04
15,491.43VALLEY-RICH CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
15,491.43
1,000.00VANETTEN, MARK CADWELL & JULIA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,000.00
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 45
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
45Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
123.63VAUGHAN, JIM ENVIRONMENTAL G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
123.63
40.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
40.00
50.04VERIZON WIRELESS SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE
11,970.79CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
74.54CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE
12,095.37
256.00VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
256.00
171.91VIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
710.01WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
881.92
261.00VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS' BENEFIT ASSN MN OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
261.00
65.39WAHL, KAREN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
65.39
450.00WALBRIDGE, DAVID PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
450.00
1,000.00WARFIELD, MELISSA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW
1,000.00
657.50WARNING LITES OF MN INC CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
657.50
549.84WARSHAWSKY, ROBERT TREE INJECTION TREE MAINTENANCE
549.84
138.08WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,246.87SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
128,777.25SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
64,224.69SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS RECYCLING SERVICE
63,654.92SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 46
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
46Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
258,041.81
557.50WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
557.50
75.00WATKINS, LANCE GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
75.00
9,725.77WATSON CO INC CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES
9,725.77
13.05WAYTEKGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
13.05
79.03WEETS, SANDRA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
79.03
89.43WEIGAND, KATHRYN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
89.43
700.00WENDINGER BAND & TRAVEL INC PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
700.00
207.57WESEMAN, JOANNE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS
207.57
618.30WHEELER HARDWARE FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
618.30
102.57WHILEY, GALEN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
102.57
790.50WHITE, BRIAN SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
790.50
91.11WHITTLESEY, NANCY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
91.11
262.50WILHOIT, CHRISTOPHER GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
262.50
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 47
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
47Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
225.00WILLIAMS, JACOB INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
225.00
2,253.92WILLIAMS, TIM PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
2,253.92
1,260.00WILLMAR WOOD PRODUCTS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
27,215.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
28,475.00
35.94WODTKE, RON SUMMER THEATER ARTS CAMP GENERAL SUPPLIES
77.46OTHER SUMMER CAMPS GENERAL SUPPLIES
113.40
67.42WOLFE, GLORIA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
67.42
225.00WRAP CITY GRAPHICS INSTALLATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
225.00OFF-LEASH DOG PARK GENERAL SUPPLIES
222.00ENVIRONMENTAL G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
88.80BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS GENERAL SUPPLIES
272.50AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,033.30
74.75WS & D PERMIT SERVICE INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDING
74.75
22,029.90XCEL ENERGY GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE ELECTRIC SERVICE
22.26OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
22,590.80PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
34,587.66WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
1,256.18REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE
3,069.22STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
5,801.24PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
64.57BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE
135.18WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE
712.95WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
24,825.12REC CENTER BUILDING ELECTRIC SERVICE
115,095.08
42.70ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 48
8/31/2015CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:02:10R55CKS2 LOGIS400V
48Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection.
8/28/20157/25/2015 -
Amount
ObjectVendorBU Description
42.70WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
397.05REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
452.40AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
42.70VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
977.55
53.48ZEMBRYKI, MARK WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
53.48
16,646.10ZIEGLER INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY
1,879.40GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
18,525.50
Report Totals 5,017,048.66
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Approval of City Disbursements Page 49
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance
amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 relating to alcoholic beverages and to approve the
summary ordinance for publication.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the proposed ordinance
amendment related to alcoholic beverages?
SUMMARY: On August 17, 2015 staff presented the Council with an ordinance amendment to
update St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 relating to alcoholic beverages. The proposed
ordinance amendment primarily incorporated recent changes to State liquor laws adopted during
the 2015 legislative session, along with several suggested housekeeping updates. Following
discussion by the Council, the first reading of the ordinance amendment was approved with the
following provisions:
- Allow holders of brewpub off-sale malt liquor licenses and brewer off-sale malt liquor
licenses to sell malt liquor off-sale between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. in 64
ounce containers (growlers).
- Remove the hours of operation restrictions for the on-sale of malt liquor at brewer taprooms.
This change would expand the hours of operation for the on-sale of malt liquor to match what
is currently allowed by state law.
- Remove language that exempts liquor license renewal applicants from paying a background
investigation fee.
The Council also directed staff to remove all language related to micro distilleries from the
proposed ordinance and to schedule that topic at a study session for further discussion.
The City Attorney’s office updated the proposed ordinance amendment as per Council direction
and also prepared the summary ordinance for publication. If Council approves the second
reading of the ordinance the summary will be published in the Sun Sailor on September 17, 2015
and the changes will take effect 15 days after publication on October 2, 2015.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Ordinance
Summary Ordinance
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: On August 17, 2015 the City Council reviewed a proposed ordinance
amendment to update St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 relating to alcoholic beverages by
incorporating changes that would allow the sale of growlers on Sundays by licensed brewers,
remove the current restrictions on hours of operation at brewer taprooms, and remove current
language in the code which exempts liquor license renewal applicants from paying a background
investigation fee.
Off-Sale of Growlers: Although the legislature changed state law to allow the sale of growlers
by licensed brewers on Sundays, the State did not set specific hours during which the off-sale of
growlers is permitted. Because the current provisions of the St. Louis Park City Code directly
reference State law regarding the permitted hours and days of sale, an ordinance amendment is
required to establish hours of operation for licensed brewers to sell growlers at off-sale on
Sundays. At the first reading of the proposed ordinance, Council authorized the inclusion of a
provision that would allow holders of brewpub off-sale malt liquor licenses and brewer off-sale
malt liquor licenses to sell malt liquor at off-sale on Sundays between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
10:00 p.m. in 64 ounce containers (growlers).
Taprooms: At the first reading of the proposed ordinance, the City Council also approved the
inclusion of an amendment that would remove the hours of operation restrictions for the on-sale
of malt liquor at brewer taprooms.
What Hours Can a Taproom be Open for Business?
Current City Code regulations limit the hours of operation for the on-sale of malt liquor at a
brewer taproom as follows:
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.
If the proposed ordinance amendment is approved, the hours of operation for the on-sale of malt
liquor at taprooms would be expanded to match what is allowed by state law.
Minnesota Statute §340A.504 regulates the hours and days of sale. No sale of intoxicating liquor
for consumption on the licensed premises may be made between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. on the
days of Monday through Saturday, or after 2:00 a.m. on Sundays, except that a taproom may be
open and may conduct on-sale business on Sundays, starting at 10:00 a.m., if authorized by the
municipality. Additionally, no licensee may sell intoxicating liquor at on-sale between the hours
of 1:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. unless the licensee has obtained a permit from the Commissioner of
Public Safety. A municipality may further limit the hours of sale of alcoholic beverages. A city
may not permit the sale of alcoholic beverages during hours when the sale is prohibited by State
law.
Do other Cities Restrict the Hours of Operation for Taprooms?
Staff reviewed the hours of operation for taprooms across the metro area and found that most
taprooms restrict their own hours of operation to a substantially lesser degree than what is
allowed by State law. The following table depicts a small sample of existing taprooms in the
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Title: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
metro area and their corresponding hours of operation. With the exception of St. Louis Park,
none of the cities referenced in the table (Minneapolis, Excelsior, Marshall, Stillwater, White
Bear Lake, Roseville, St. Paul) restrict the hours of operation for taprooms beyond what is
allowed by State law.
Taproom City Hours of Operation
M T W R F S S
612 Brew Minneapolis x x 4 - 10pm 4 -
10pm
2:30pm -
12 am
Noon -
12am
11:30am
- 9pm
Bauhaus
Brew Labs Minneapolis x x 4 - 11pm 4 -
11pm 3 - 11pm Noon -
11pm x
Boom Island
Brewing Minneapolis x x 4 – 9pm 4 - 9pm 4 - 9 pm 1 - 9 pm 1 - 6pm
Harriet
Brewing Minneapolis x 4 - 10pm 4-11 pm 4 -
11pm
4 pm –
12 am
1 pm –
12 am 2 - 9pm
*Surly
Brewing Co. Minneapolis 11am -
11pm
11am -
11pm
11am -
11pm
11am -
11pm
11am -
midnight
11am -
midnight
11am -
11pm
Excelsior
Brewing Excelsior x X 4 - 10pm 4 -
11pm 4 - 11pm Noon -
11pm
Noon -
6pm
*Brau
Brothers
Brewing
Marshall 11am -
11pm
11am -
11pm
11am -
11pm
11am -
11pm
11am -
11pm
11am -
11pm
11am -
9pm
Lift Bridge
Brewery Stillwater x 5 - 10pm 5 – 10pm 5–10
pm
Noon -
10pm
Noon -
10pm
Noon -
6pm
Bent
Brewstillery Roseville x X 4 - 10pm 4-10 pm 2:30 -
11pm
Noon -
11pm 1 - 5pm
Big Wood
Brewery
White Bear
Lake x 4 - 10pm 4 - 10pm 4-10 pm 3 - 11pm 1 - 11pm X
Bang
Brewing St. Paul x X x x 4 - 10pm 2 - 8pm X
Tin
Whiskers St. Paul x X 4 - 10pm 4 -
10pm 3 - 11pm Noon -
11pm
Noon -
5pm
*Urban
Growler St. Paul x 3 - 10pm 3 - 10pm 3 -
10pm
Noon -
11pm
Noon -
11pm
Noon -
8pm
Steel Toe
Brewing
St. Louis
Park x x 3 - 8pm 3 - 8pm 3 - 10pm Noon -
10pm x
* = on-site food service at taproom
Are Taprooms Subject to the City’s Food Sales Ratio Requirement?
No. Current city code provisions prohibit a restaurant from being located at a brewery with a
taproom license, however it is important to note that nothing in State law precludes the holder of
a brewer taproom license from also operating a restaurant at the taproom. In this case, St. Louis
Park has chosen to be more restrictive than State law. Although State law allows it, the majority
of taprooms in the State do not serve food. Food trucks, however, are a staple of the taproom
scene and are often featured outside of taprooms for service to patrons. Food truck operations
are independent of taproom operations.
Will the Annual License Fee for a Taproom Change?
The current annual fee for a brewer taproom license is $600. Staff is currently reviewing this fee
in comparison to that of surrounding cities. This will be further discussed in conjunction with
the adoption of the annual fee schedule for 2016.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 4
Title: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
Background Investigation Fee for License Renewals: After further review of current
ordinance provisions and liquor license renewal practices, staff also recommends the removal of
language which exempts liquor license renewal applicants from paying a background
investigation fee. St. Louis Park City Code Sec. 3-65 states that liquor license renewal
applications are subject to a background investigation by the Police Department. Staff feels that
applicants for the renewal of a liquor license should be subject to a background investigation by
the Police Department to ensure that both the applicant and on-site manager have not had any
violations during the previous year that would prohibit them from continuing to hold a liquor
license. To that end, staff feels that the City would need to recover the costs associated with
such investigations. Removal of the language exempting renewal applicants from paying a
background investigation fee is the first step in the process of establishing such a fee. A
background investigation fee for liquor license renewal applications will be proposed on the
2016 fee schedule after additional research and internal discussion with the Police Department.
NEXT STEPS:
September 17, 2015 – Publication of Summary Ordinance in Sun Sailor
October 2, 2015 – Effective Date of Ordinance Changes
October 5, 2015 - 2016 Fee Schedule Review and Public Hearing
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 5
Title: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
ORDINANCE NO.____-15
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3, SECTION 57 TO PERMIT
HOLDERS OF BREWPUB AND BREWER OFF-SALE MALT LIQUOR
LICENSES TO SELL GROWLERS ON SUNDAYS; ELIMINATE
CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS ON HOURS OF OPERATION FOR ON-SALE
OF MALT LIQUOR AT BREWER TAPROOMS; AND AMENDING
CHAPTER 3 SECTION 59 TO SUBJECT LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWAL
APPLICATIONS TO INVESTIGATION FEE
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Chapter 3 is amended as follows:
ARTICLE II. SALE, CONSUMPTION AND DISPLAY
***
Sec. 3-57 Classifications
***
(12) Brewpub off- sale malt liquor license. A brew pub off-sale malt liquor license may be
issued, with the approval of the commissioner, to a brewer who holds an on-sale
intoxicating liquor or 3.2 percent malt liquor license issued by the city for a restaurant
operated in the place of manufacture, 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 except an establishment that holds a brewpub off-sale malt liquor
license may sell malt liquor off-sale between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
on Sundays. The malt liquor shall be packaged in 64-ounce containers commonly
known as growlers only.
c. The malt liquor sold off-sale must be removed from the licensed premises before
the applicable off-sale closing time pursuant to section 3-105.
d. 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:
(Ord. No. 2388-10, 8-13-10)
1) The containers 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 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.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 6
Title: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
3) The adhesive band, strip or sleeve shall bear the name and address of the
brewer/licensee selling the malt liquor.
4) The containers 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.
e. The retail sales for a brewer/licensee at on-sale or off-sale under this subsection
may not exceed 3,500 barrels per year, provided that off-sales may not total more
than 50 percent of the brewer/licensee's production or 500 barrels, whichever is
less.
f. A brewer operating a brewpub may hold or have an interest in other retail on-sale
licenses, but may not have an ownership interest in whole or in part, or be an
officer, director, agent or employee of, any other manufacturer, brewer, importer, or
wholesaler or be an affiliate thereof, whether the affiliation is corporate or by
management, direction or control. Notwithstanding this prohibition, a brewer
licensed under this provision may be an affiliate or subsidiary company of a brewer
licensed in Minnesota or elsewhere if that brewer's only manufacture of malt liquor
is:
1) As a brewpub as defined herein and limited to the regulations of a brewpub by
this chapter;
2) Manufactured in another state for consumption exclusively in a restaurant
located in the place of manufacture or brewing; or
3) Manufactured in another state for consumption primarily in a restaurant located
in or immediately adjacent to the place of manufacture, if the brewer was
licensed subject to the regulations herein on January 1, 1995.
***
(13) Brewer off-sale malt liquor license. A brewer who has a license from the
Commissioner of Public Safety to brew 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 except an establishment that holds a brewer off-sale malt liquor
license may sell malt liquor off-sale between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
on Sundays. The malt liquor shall be packaged in 64-ounce containers commonly
known as growlers only.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 7
Title: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
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.
***
(14) Brewer taproom license. A brewer who has a license from the Commissioner of
Public Safety to brew up to 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.
d. A restaurant is not allowed at a brewery with a taproom license.
e. On-sale of malt liquor shall be limited to the legal hours for on sale pursuant to
section 3-105 except an establishment that a holds a brewer taproom license may
sell malt liquor produced by the brewer on the licensed premises on-sale for
consumption between the hours 10:00 a.m. on Sundays and 2:00 a.m. on
Mondays.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 8
Title: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
***
Sec. 3-59. Retail license fees.
(a) Annual fees. The annual fee for all licenses shall be set by the city council, by resolution,
in amounts no greater than those set forth in M.S.A. ch. 340A.
(b) Prorated fees. If a license application under this division is made during the license year,
the license shall be issued for the remainder of the year for a pro rata fee, with any unexpired
fraction of a month being counted as one month.
(c) Investigation fees. Investigation fees shall be determined by resolution of the city council.
Investigation fees are nonrefundable. No investigation fee shall be charged for a renewal
application. At any time that an additional investigation is required because of a change in the
control of a corporate license, change in manager, change in location or enlargement of the
premises, the licensee shall pay an additional investigation fee. Where a new application is filed
as a result of incorporation or a change of name by an existing licensee and the ownership
control and interest in the license are unchanged, no additional investigation fee will be required.
(d) Payment. All fees required to be paid in connection with a license under this section shall
be paid at the time of the filing of the license application. License and permit fees shall be paid
into the general fund.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its passage and
publication.
First Reading August 17, 2015
Second Reading September 8, 2015
Date of Publication September 17, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect October 2, 2015
ADOPTED this 8th day of September, 2015 by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park.
Reviewed for Administration:
______________________________________
City Manager
Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
_____________________________________
Mayor
Attest:
_____________________________________
City Clerk
Approved as to form and execution:
______________________________________
City Attorney
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4b) Page 9
Title: Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages
SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO. ____-15
ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3, SECTION 57 TO PERMIT HOLDERS
OF BREWPUB AND BREWER OFF-SALE MALT LIQUOR LICENSES TO
SELL GROWLERS ON SUNDAYS; ELIMINATE CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS
ON HOURS OF OPERATION FOR ON-SALE OF MALT LIQUOR AT BREWER
TAPROOMS; AND AMENDING CHAPTER 3 SECTION 59 TO SUBJECT
LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATIONS TO INVESTIGATION FEE
This ordinance amends Chapter 3 of the City Code to permit holders of brewpub
off-sale malt liquor licenses and brewer off-sale malt liquor licenses to sell
growlers on Sundays; eliminate certain restrictions on hours of operation for on-
sale of malt liquor at brewer taprooms; and to subject liquor license renewal
applications to an investigation fee.
Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City
Clerk.
Published in the St. Louis Park Sailor: September 17, 2015
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Job’s Daughters Foundation
of Minnesota
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor
License for the Job’s Daughters Foundation of Minnesota for an event to be held on October 17,
2015, at the Paul Revere Masonic Center, 6509 Walker Street in St. Louis Park.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to approve a Temporary On-Sale
Intoxicating Liquor License for the Job’s Daughters Foundation of Minnesota for their non-profit
charitable event being held at the Paul Revere Masonic Center on October 17, 2015?
SUMMARY: The Job’s Daughters Foundation of Bloomington, Minnesota, has applied for a
temporary liquor license for their “Fairly French” World of Wine Renaissance Dinner and Silent
Auction Fundraiser to be held Saturday, October 17, from 5:00 to 10:00 p.m. at the Paul Revere
Masonic Center, 6509 Walker Street.
The purpose of Job’s Daughters International is to develop girls and young women (ages 10-20)
into leaders through citizenship, leadership and friendship.
The Police Department has completed the background investigation on the principals and has
found no reason to deny the temporary license. The applicant has met all requirements for
issuance of the license, and staff is recommending approval.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The fee for a temporary liquor license is
$100.00 per day of the event.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Kay Midura, Office Assistant – City Clerk’s Office
Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: First Reading Shoreham PUD Amendment
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve First Reading of an Ordinance amending
Chapter 36 of the City Code relating to The Shoreham Planned Unit Development.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the amendment to the PUD allow material changes to
what was approved by the Council originally?
SUMMARY: City staff is requesting an amendment to the Shoreham Planned Unit
Development (PUD), 36-268-PUD 1, established by Ordinance 2471-15 to correct a technical
error discovered in the Ordinance text. The amendment in no way changes the previously
approved project but rather corrects an error within the Ordinance text so that the PUD text is
consistent with the approved development plans and the neighborhood, Planning Commission
and City Council intentions. The proposed change will correct and clarify that multiple-family
residential only, is permitted on the southern portion of the property and that mixed-use
development is permitted on the northern portion of the property.
This amendment is a major amendment to the Shoreham PUD Ordinance. A public hearing
before the Planning Commission was held August 19, 2015. No comments were received and no
one was present to speak. The Second Reading is tentatively scheduled for the September 21
Council meeting.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Draft Ordinance
Official Exhibit Sheet AS100
Prepared by: Ryan Kelley, Planner
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Michele Schnitker, Deputy Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: First Reading of Shoreham PUD Amendment
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The Shoreham PUD was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission on May 6, 2015 and approved by the City Council June 1, 2015. The approved
PUD consists of a mixed-use building that includes up to 150 residential units, and 20,000 square
feet of general office and medical office uses. The approved building will be five stories along
the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 25 Frontage Road and three stories along 31st Street
West. The site plan includes a driveway that runs through the site, connecting between France
Avenue on the east and Glenhurst Avenue on the west. This driveway, which provides access to
the on-site parking, divides the site approximately in half, with the north portion of the site
having the five-story building and the southern portion of the site, along 31st Street West, having
the three-story building. The approved plans additionally included only multiple-family
residential units on the southern portion of the site and the mixed-use development on the
northern portion of the site.
The neighborhood expressed their support for this arrangement of uses on the site, and
appreciated the smaller-scale building on 31st Street with only multiple-family residential units.
Staff, as well as the Planning Commission and City Council also supported this site plan. The
staff report that accompanied the PUD ordinance included the following paragraph to this point:
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.
For the purpose of writing the ordinance, under the City’s recently adopted PUD Ordinance, and
to clearly illustrate the development regulations for different portions of the site, the site was
divided into two zones; Zone A, which is the northern portion of the site, and Zone B, which is
the southern portion. Sheet AS100 of the Official Exhibits, referenced in the Ordinance,
illustrated this site division, and Ordinance 2471-15 has a text description of this same division
which is consistent with the Official Exhibit. The Ordinance uses these zones to regulate such
items as the height of buildings within each zone, the permitted uses within each zone, and the
façade requirements of each zone.
After the Ordinance was adopted by the Council on June 1, 2015 and the Summary Ordinance
subsequently published, an error was discovered regarding how the permitted uses were assigned
to each zone and the reference to those zones for façade requirements. The uses that were to be
permitted in Zone B were listed under Zone A, namely the multiple family residential use, and
the uses that were to be permitted in Zone A were listed under Zone B. This PUD amendment
will correct this error and list the uses under the appropriate zones and reference the appropriate
zone for façade requirements. The amendment does not change the approved development plans
previously shown to the neighborhood, Planning Commission or City Council.
NEXT STEPS: The second reading is tentatively scheduled for the September 21, 2015
meeting on the consent agenda.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 3
Title: First Reading of Shoreham PUD Amendment
ORDINANCE NO. ___-15
ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 36-268-PUD 1
RELATING TO ZONING BY CORRECTING A TEXT ERROR
IN THE SHOREHAM PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
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 City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 15-35-PUD) for amending Section 36-268-PUD 1, established by
Ordinance 2471-15 adopted June 1, 2015, to correct a text error in said Ordinance related to the
permitted uses and façade requirements within specific portions of the redevelopment site.
Sec. 5. 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
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 4
Title: First Reading of Shoreham PUD Amendment
15. A120 – Level 2 Floor Plan
16. A130 – Level 3 Floor Plan
17. A140 – Level 4 Floor Plan
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-one (291) parking spaces will be provided: 203 spaces for
residential units and 88 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. 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.
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.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 5
Title: First Reading of Shoreham PUD Amendment
(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.
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.
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.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 6
Title: First Reading of Shoreham PUD Amendment
(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.
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 BA:
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. 6. 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. 7. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Public Hearing August 19, 2015
First Reading September 8, 2015
Second Reading September 21, 2015
Date of Publication September 24, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect October 9, 2015
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4d) Page 7
Title: First Reading of Shoreham PUD Amendment
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
13,822 SF
14%
ZONE A
ZONE B
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4d)
Title: First Reading of Shoreham PUD Amendment Page 8
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Special Assessment – Water Service Line Repair at 2929 Texa Tonka Avenue South
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment
for the repair of the water service line at 2929 Texa Tonka Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN
P.I.D. 07-117-21-44-0038.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The proposed action is consistent with policy previously
established by the City Council.
SUMMARY: Manuel Villagrana Robles, owner of the single family residence at 2929 Texa
Tonka Avenue South, has requested the City to authorize the repair of the water service line for
his/her home and assess the cost against the property in accordance with the City’s special
assessment policy.
This is a 2015 repair that was made between the home and the curb box and is not impacted by the
City’s new waterline ownership policy. Homeowners are still responsible for water lines repairs that
occur between their home and the curb box located in the right of way.
The City requires the repair of service lines to promote the general public health, safety and welfare
within the community. The special assessment policy for the repair or replacement of water or sewer
service lines for existing homes was adopted by the City Council in 1996. This program was put into
place because sometimes property owners face financial hardships when emergency repairs like this
are unexpectedly required.
Plans and permits for this service line repair work were completed, submitted, and approved by City
staff. The property owner hired a contractor and repaired the water service line in compliance with
current codes and regulations. Based on the completed work, this repair qualifies for the City’s
special assessment program. The property owner has petitioned the City to authorize the water service
line repair and special assess the cost of the repair. The total eligible cost of the repair has been
determined to be $3,695.00.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City has funds in place to finance the
cost of this special assessment.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Jay Hall , Utility Superintendent
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Pat Sulander, Accountant
Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Special Assessment – Water Service Line Repair at 2929 Texa Tonka Avenue South
RESOLUTION NO. 15 - ___
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE REPAIR OF THE WATER SERVICE LINE AT
2929 TEXA TONKA AVENUE SOUTH, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN
P.I.D. 07-117-21-44-0038
WHEREAS, the Property Owner at 2929 Texa Tonka Avenue South, has petitioned the City
of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the water service line for the single
family residence located at 2929 Texa Tonka Avenue South, and
WHEREAS, the Property Owner has agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, right of
notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
Utility Superintendent related to the repair of the water service line.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, that:
1. The petition from the Property Owner requesting the approval and special assessment for the
water service line repair is hereby accepted.
2. The water service line repair that was done in conformance with the plans and specifications
approved by the Public Works and Inspections Departments is hereby accepted.
3. The total cost for the repair of the water service line is accepted at $3,695.00.
4. The Property Owner has agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, notice and appeal from
the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by other
statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law.
5. The Property Owner has agreed to pay the City for the total cost of the above improvements
through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at the interest rate of 4%.
6. The Property Owner has executed an agreement with the City and all other documents
necessary to implement the repair of the water service line and the special assessment of all
costs associated therewith.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Statutory Tort Limits for Liability Insurance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution electing not to waive the statutory
tort limits for liability insurance.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with Staff’s recommendation to
continue the past decision not to waive the statutory tort limits for liability insurance?
SUMMARY: Each year the Council is required to pass a resolution indicating if they wish to
waive or not waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability insurance established by
Minnesota Statute 466.04.
The statutory liability limits for claims that occur after July 1, 2009 are $500,000 per claimant
and $1,500,000 per occurrence.
The City Council must review and make an election of one of the following three options:
• Not to waive the statutory tort limits
• Waive the limits and not purchase excess liability coverage.
• Waive the limits and purchase excess liability coverage
The three options are given in more detail in the background of the report.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City will continue to maintain liability
insurance coverage through the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust in the amount
required by State Statute, and the required annual motion will be in place in preparation for the
new policy year.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Prepared by: Coty Hemann, Accountant
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Statutory Tort Limits for Liability Insurance
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The three options the City Council has are detailed below. The City’s
practice has been option 1, to not waive the statutory tort limits. Staff recommends the Council
continue with this practice.
Option 1 (Current)
If the city elects not to waive the statutory tort limits, an individual claimant would be able to
recover no more than $500,000 on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. The total
which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence would be limited to
$1,500,000.
Option 2
If the city waives the statutory tort limits and does not purchase excess liability coverage, a
single claimant could potentially recover up to $1,500,000 on a single occurrence. The total
which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort
limits apply would also be limited to $1,500,000, regardless of the number of claimants.
Option 3
If the city waives the statutory tort limits and purchases excess liability coverage, a single
claimant could potentially recover an amount up to the limit of the coverage purchased. The
total which all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory
tort limits apply would also be limited to the amount of coverage purchased, regardless of the
number of claimants.
The City of St. Louis Park in the past has elected to not waive the statutory tort limits and has not
purchased excess liability coverage. Staff recommends continuing this practice and not to waive
the statutory limits. The attached resolution allows the statutory tort limits to remain in place
until the Council changes this election. Staff will ask Council to consider this question annually
as required by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4f) Page 3
Title: Statutory Tort Limits for Liability Insurance
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION ELECTING NOT TO WAIVE THE
STATUTORY TORT LIMITS
FOR LIABILITY INSURANCE
WHEREAS, pursuant to previous action taken, the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance
Trust has requested the City to make an election with regard to waiving or not waiving its tort
liability established by Minnesota Statute 466.04; and
WHEREAS, the choices available are to not waive the statutory limit, to waive the limit but
to keep insurance coverage at the statutory limit, or to waive the limit and to add additional
insurance coverage;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the St. Louis Park City Council does
hereby elect not to waive the statutory tort liability limit established by Minnesota Statute 466.04
and that such election is effective until amended by further resolution of the St. Louis Park City
Council.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bid Tabulation: Reject Bids for the 2015 Random Concrete Repair – Project No.
4015-0003
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to reject bids for the 2015 Random Concrete Repair
Project – Project No. 4015-0003 and authorize re-advertisement for bids.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable
SUMMARY: A total of two (2) bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid
results is as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Ti-Zak Concrete $267,558.00
G.L. Contracting $378,837.40
Engineer’s Estimate
$208,638.00
Staff has reviewed the bids submitted and has tabulated the results. The lowest bid was 28%
above the Engineer’s Estimate. With two bids received and the cost of sidewalk replacement
considerably over the estimate, staff recommends rejecting these bids and re-advertising the
project with a longer completion time allowance. It is the recommendation of Staff to amend the
completion date to June 30, 2016.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
These projects were planned for and included in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement
Program with an estimated budget of $ 194,000.00. Based on the low bid received the total
project costs are estimated to be $277,058.00, which means an additional funding source would
need to be identified. This project is funded by the Public Works Operations budget, Stormwater
Utility budget and the Pavement Management budget. Funding details are provided in the
Discussion section.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Phil Elkin, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation: Reject Bids for the 2015 Random Concrete Repair – Project No. 4015-0003
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Bids were received on August 11, 2015 for the annual repair and construction
of sidewalk, curb and gutter, and storm sewer catch basins at various locations in the city. Staff
annually surveys the condition of sidewalks to identify hazards for repair. Panels of sidewalk
that are cracked or have been lifted by tree roots to create trip hazards that need to be removed
and replaced are included in this contract. Curb and gutter with similar defects that create
drainage or safety problems are also repaired. Deteriorating catch basins that are within the work
area will also be repaired or rebuilt. Most of this work will be concentrated in next year’s
sealcoating area (Area 1 which includes the Texa Tonka, Lenox, and Sorensen neighborhoods).
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on July 16, 2015. In
addition, plans and specifications are noticed on the City Website and are made available
electronically via the internet by our vendor Quest CDN.com.
Seven contractors/vendors purchased plan sets including two Disadvantaged Business
Enterprises (DBE) and one Veterans Preferred business
Funding Details
Based on the low bid received, cost and funding details are revised as follows:
Expenditures
Construction Cost (proposed contract) $ 267,558.00
Engineering & Administration (12%) $ 9,500.00
Total $ 277,058.00
Revenues
PW Operations Funds (sidewalk repairs) $ 45,000.00
PW Operations Funds (curb and gutter repairs) $ 50,000.00
Pavement Management Funds $ 127,058.00
Stormwater Utility Funds $ 55,000.00
Total $ 277,058.00
Construction Timeline:
It is staff’s recommendation to reject the bids received in August and rebid the contract with a
new construction completion date of June 30, 2016.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4h
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Homes Within Reach: City Funded Revolving Line of Credit to Assist w/ Acquisition
and Rehab Costs of Affordable Homeownership Units
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve increasing the revolving line of credit that
the City previously approved for Homes Within Reach (HWR), also known as West Hennepin
Affordable Housing Land Trust (WHAHLT), from the current amount of $250,000 to $500,000.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to increase the revolving line of
credit to enable the City to continue to further facilitate affordable homeownership opportunities
in our community?
SUMMARY: Staff provided a written report describing the Homes Within Reach request for an
increase to their line of credit at the August 24, 2015 Study Session. HWR purchases properties,
rehabilitates and then sells the home to qualified low to moderate income households with
incomes at or below 80% of the median area income. Buyers pay for the cost of the home only
and lease the land for 99 years. City funds are leveraged with CDBG, Hennepin County
Affordable Housing Incentive Fund (AHIF), HOME, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Housing
and other funds. Since the program began in 2007 twelve homes have been purchased and sold to
low to moderate income families.
In 2009 the council approved a line of credit for HWR and they have accessed the line of credit
on seven home purchases. The funds from the line-of-credit provide financial assistance for the
cost of the acquisition, maintenance/repair and rehab prior to the sale of the home to a
homebuyer. The line-of-credit saves HWR the cost of accessing funds through an interest
bearing line-of-credit with a financial lender. The line-of-credit is repaid upon the sale of the
home in accordance with the Agreement between the city and HWR.
Increasing the line of credit to a maximum of $500,000 would provide HWR the ability to
purchase and rehab two properties simultaneously if the opportunity presents itself. Increasing
the line of credit would be a helpful tool to allow HWR to react to new opportunities that can be
hindered by project timelines and 12 month funding constraints from sources such as CDBG. On
average HWR has paid back the line of credit six months from the purchase date.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Housing Rehab fund will be the source
of funds utilized to establish the revolving line-of-credit. In addition to the line-of-credit, the City
will continue to provide financial assistance through the allocation of Housing Rehab funds and
CDBG funds as available to facilitate the purchase of new affordable homes in St. Louis Park.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Marney Olson, Assistant Housing Supervisor
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/CD Deputy Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: HWR: City Funded Revolving Line of Credit to Assist w/ Acquisition & Rehab Costs of Affordable Homes
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: For over a decade, several west metro communities including St. Louis Park
have been partnering with Homes Within Reach (HWR) to create long term affordable home-
ownership.
The goal of this private non-profit is to provide ownership opportunities for working households
in suburban Hennepin County at or below 80% of Area Median Income. Buyers pay for the cost
of the home only and lease the land for 99 years. In addition, if a family wants to sell the
property, the home may be purchased by HWR to ensure the long term affordability of the home.
City funds are leveraged with CDBG, Hennepin County Affordable Housing Incentive Fund
(AHIF), HOME, Metropolitan Council, Minnesota Housing and other funds. Since the program
began in 2007 twelve homes have been purchased and sold to low to moderate income families.
Since its inception, HWR has sold 118 homes and placed 135 families across 11 suburban
communities including 12 homes in St. Louis Park over the last 9 years. In 2009 the council
approved a line of credit for HWR and they have accessed the line of credit on seven home
purchases. The funds from the line-of-credit provide financial assistance for the cost of the
acquisition, maintenance/repair and rehab prior to the sale of the home to a homebuyer. The
line-of-credit saves HWR the cost of accessing funds through an interest bearing line-of-credit
with a financial lender. The line-of-credit is repaid upon the sale of the home in accordance with
the Agreement between the city and HWR. The following chart profiles the 12 projects in St.
Louis Park:
Categories 2002-6/15
HWR Totals
2002-6/15
SLP Totals Comments
Total HWR Parcels 121 12
HWR Households 118 11
HWR Resales 17 3
HWR Total Families Served 135 13
HWR Average Income Served $42,283 $44,328
HWR Area Median Income Served
(%) 60.8% 61.9% Income and family size
drives AMI calculation
HWR Average Final Mortgage
Amount $906 $945 Includes PITI
HWR Average Sale Price $125,502 $126,125
HWR Number Persons Served 459 51 Includes 3 resales
Number of Communities Served 11 1
Increasing the line of credit to a maximum of $500,000 would provide HWR the ability to
purchase and rehab two properties simultaneously if the opportunity presents itself. This increase
is comparable to what some of our neighboring communities have provided HWR. Minnetonka
currently has a line of credit of $750,000 and in the past Eden Prairie has had a $500,000 line of
credit when HWR was producing more than one property per year in this community. Increasing
the line of credit would be a helpful tool to allow HWR to react to new opportunities that can be
hindered by project timelines and 12 month funding constraints from sources such as CDBG. On
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4h) Page 3
Title: HWR: City Funded Revolving Line of Credit to Assist w/ Acquisition & Rehab Costs of Affordable Homes
average HWR has paid back the line of credit six months from the purchase date. Each draw will
be interest free, except that any interest HWR earns on the funds must be paid to the city. The
City Manager will have full discretion to approve or deny funding for each housing unit and the
funds will be designated to fund acquisition, rehab and repair costs. HWR will be required to
submit a written request to the city that includes the property’s address and estimated market
value. Purchase price and a closing statement will be submitted following the closing. A portion
of the funds will be repaid to the city upon sale of the home to a homebuyer with the remaining
balance due within 90 days. HWR has promptly paid back the line of credit each time it has been
accessed and on average HWR has paid back the line of credit 6 months from the date they
accessed the line of credit.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: HWR has a purchase agreement in place to purchase the
13th home in St. Louis Park with a closing planned for October. HWR’s community land trust
model approach helps families purchase an affordable home in St. Louis Park and continues to
be a great resource for our community.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Authorize Submittal of Mighty Ducks Grant Application for The Rec Center
Refrigeration Replacement Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the submission of a
Mighty Ducks Grant application to the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission in the amount of
$400,000 for The Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement Project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUMMARY: The 2015 Minnesota State Legislature has allocated up to $2 million this session
for R-22 refrigeration replacement (phase-out), indoor air quality improvements and construction
of new ice arenas. Distribution of the funding is being administered by the Minnesota Amateur
Sport Commission. Grant applications are due October 1, 2015 with notice of awards occurring
in November of 2015. If awarded funding, grant funds must be matched dollar for dollar by the
City. The grant funds must be used within 16 months of awarding of funds.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Rec Center Refrigeration replacement
project is estimated at $4,678,700. The project is out for bid with bid closing in late September.
Securing of the Mighty Ducks grant will assist with the funding of the refrigeration replacement
project.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Jason Eisold, Rec Center Manager
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: Authorize Submittal of Mighty Ducks Grant Application for Rec Center Refrigeration Replacement Project
RESOLUTION NO. 15 - _____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FILING OF APPLICATION AND
COMMITMENT TO EXECUTE A LGU MIGHTY DUCKS GRANT AGREEMENT
IF FUNDS ARE AWARDED
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Amateur Sports Commission (MASC), via the State General
Fund, provides for general funds to assist political subdivisions of the State of Minnesota for the
fulfillment of the purpose and goals of the Mighty Ducks Grant Program, and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park desires to complete its project named Rec Center
Refrigeration Replacement Project at The Rec Center located at 3700 Monterey Drive, St. Louis
Park, Minnesota.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota that:
1. The current total cost estimate for project completion is $4,678,700. The City of St. Louis
Park is requesting $400,000 from the Mighty Ducks Grant Program and will assume
responsibility for a matching contribution of $400,000.
2. The City of St. Louis Park agrees to own, assume 100 percent operational costs for the
facility, and will operate the facility for its intended purpose for the functional life of the
facility which is estimated to be 30 years.
3. The City of St. Louis Park agrees to enter into necessary and required agreements with the
MASC for the specific purpose of completing the project.
4. That a request for reimbursement be made to the MASC for the amount awarded after the
completion of the project.
5. That Jason Eisold, Rec Center Manager, and/or The City of St. Louis Park is authorized and
directed to execute said application and serve as the official liaison with the MASC.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jeffrey W. Jacobs, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4j
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution supporting the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District’s Japs-Olson Stormwater Management project, and to authorize the City
Manager to sign the Stormwater Management Agreement and the Agreement to jointly
administer the Financial Guarantee with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District’s enhancements to the stormwater ponds required for the new Japs-Olson
parking lot?
SUMMARY: The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) is asking for a Resolution
supporting its proposed enhancements of the stormwater pond required as part of the recently
approved Japs-Olson parking lot improvements on the former Appliance Smart property. The
parking lot was approved by the City Council on June 15, 2015. Since then, the MCWD has
been working with Japs-Olson to enhance the pond and incorporate it into the wetland basin
located on property owned by the MCWD to the east. The resolution of support includes a
Stormwater Management Agreement and a Joint Administration of Financial Assurance, both
described below.
Stormwater Management Agreement. The MCWD is asking the City to show its support of
their project by including it in the Stormwater Management Agreement. The agreement does not
bind the City to any maintenance or construction costs.
Joint Administration of Financial Assurance for Japs-Olson Company. Both the City and
the MCWD require a letter of credit (LOC) for the proposed stormwater improvements. The
value of the LOCs is in excess of $500,000 each. The joint administration agreement will avoid
Japs-Olson from having to submit two letters of credit. This same approach has been used for
the West End and The Shops at Knollwood projects.
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
Resolution of Support
Stormwater Management Agreement
Agreement-Joint Admin of Financial Assurance for Japs-Olson
Development Plans
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
DISCUSSION
APPROVED IMPROVEMENTS:
The parking lot and stormwater improvements were approved by the City Council on June 15,
2015 by a conditional use permit. A copy of the approved plans is attached. At the time, it was
known that the MCWD had an interest in enhancing the stormwater pond, so it was noted in the
approval of the parking lot project that the stormwater plans would be administratively replaced
after the MCWD finalized its plans.
MCWD PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS:
The revised plans are attached to show the extent of the MCWD’s enhancements. The proposed
enhancements will:
1. Expand the stormwater management to include runoff water from other properties currently
discharging into the Minnehaha Creek untreated.
2. Restore wetlands.
3. Enhance the water quality of Minnehaha Creek.
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT:
Attached is a Resolution of Support for the proposed MCWD improvements. The MCWD is
asking that the City enter into the Stormwater Management Agreement. The agreement spells
out terms between the MCWD and Japs-Olson. The City’s participation in the agreement is not
required to issue city permits, however, the MCWD Commission is requesting it as a show of
support of the project. The agreement does not bind the City to any construction or maintenance
costs.
JOINT ADMINISTRATION OF FINANCIAL ASSURANCE FOR JAPS OLSON COMPANY:
Both the City and the MCWD require a letter of credit (LOC) for the proposed stormwater
improvements. The value of the LOCs is in excess of $500,000 each.
In an effort to avoid Japs-Olson from having to submit two letters of credit the MCWD is willing
to enter into an agreement with the City whereby the City will maintain control of the LOC,
however, the MCWD will also have the ability to draw upon it if Japs-Olson doesn’t complete
the project. Since the City and the MCWD both have the same goal and requirement that the
plan be completed, the 2nd LOC is redundant, and jointly administering the LOC is reasonable.
This has been done at West End and at The Shops at Knollwood.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 3
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
RESOLUTION NO. 15-___
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
JAPS OLSON STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECT
AT 7400 EXCELSIOR BLVD
WHEREAS, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) is proposing the expansion of
stormwater management on the Japs Olson property in St. Louis Park to include regional
collection and treatment of stormwater, and restoration of wetland and upland areas to protect
and enhance Minnehaha Creek; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project includes construction of storm sewer infrastructure in
St. Louis Park along Meadowbrook Road to divert stormwater from an area in St. Louis Park to
the proposed stormwater pond; and
WHEREAS, MCWD needs the consent of the City of St. Louis Park to move forward with the
project; and
WHEREAS, the project enhances the community and environment in St. Louis Park.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota that the City supports the Japs Olson Stormwater Management Project as
detailed in the stormwater management agreement, and the City Manager is authorized to sign
the stormwater management agreement and the Joint Administration of Financial Assurance for
Japs-Olson Company.
ADOPTED this 8th day of September, 2015, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 4
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, City of St. Louis Park
and Japs-Olson Company
This Stormwater Management Agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and among the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District, a watershed district with purposes and powers as set forth at Minnesota
Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D (“District”); the City of St. Louis Park, a home rule charter city of
the State of Minnesota (“City”); and Japs-Olson Company, a Delaware corporation (“Japs-Olson”)
(together, “the Parties”).
Article 1 - Recitals
1.01 These Recitals are incorporated into the Agreement and are a binding part thereof.
1.02 Japs-Olson owns property within the City of St. Louis Park consisting of seven contiguous
parcels of record, as follows:
Address Property Identification Number
3964 Meadowbrook Road 2011721230012
3985 Meadowbrook Road 2011721240017
7400 Excelsior Boulevard 2011721310010
7500 Excelsior Boulevard 2011721320001
7630 Excelsior Boulevard 2011721320002
No address 2011721320003
7630 Excelsior Boulevard 2011721320004
1.03 The District owns property within the City of St. Louis Park consisting of four contiguous
parcels abutting the Japs-Olson properties, as follows:
Address Property Identification Number
7200 Excelsior Boulevard 2011721240015
7250 Excelsior Boulevard 2011721240016
7202 Excelsior Boulevard 2011721310008
7252 Excelsior Boulevard 2011721310009
1.04 The contiguous property of Japs-Olson and of the District is riparian to Minnehaha Creek.
Minnehaha Creek, and Lake Hiawatha through which it flows downstream, are public waters
subject to a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) under state law for failure to meet state water
quality standards for nutrients and bacteria. The District, in cooperation with the City, has
expended public funds to restore creek, wetland and riparian resources on its property; to
construct public facilities to provide water quality treatment to stormwater runoff before it
discharges into the creek; and to construct trails, boardwalk and related public educational and
recreational assets.
1.05 Japs-Olson intends to expand its commercial facility located on its above-listed properties
(the “Project”). The Project will occur, generally, in two phases. Phase 1, generally, will involve
the demolition of existing structures on the eastern part of its property, construction of parking,
and construction of stormwater management facilities consisting of parking lot filtration medians
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 5
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
and a filtration basin with associated pretreatment basins. Phase 2, generally, will involve the
demolition of parking on the western part of its property and the expansion of its buildings. Japs-
Olson plans to construct Phase 1 in 2015 and Phase 2 in 2016.
1.06 Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §103D.341, the District has adopted and implements rules
and permitting requirements governing land disturbance. Japs-Olson applied to the District for
erosion control and stormwater management permits for the Project. District Permit No. 15-413
was approved by the District Board of Managers on August 27, 2015. This Agreement is a
condition of permit issuance.
1.07 The Project also is subject to City permits and approvals. A conditional use permit for
Phase 1 has been approved and conditions for issuance are expected to be met shortly
1.08 In order to meet District and City requirements for management of stormwater from its
redevelopment, Japs-Olson must adequately capture and treat two distinct catchments from its
expanded facility, one flowing east toward Meadowbrook Road, and one flowing west toward
Powell Road. Japs-Olson’s preferred method of treating the eastern catchment is to construct: (a)
a filtration basin with a pretreatment basin on its property east of Meadowbrook Road (together,
“Eastern Basin”), discharging to Minnehaha Creek; and (b) parking lot filtration medians, with
each installation discharging, after treatment, to the Eastern Basin. Its preferred method of
treating the western catchment is to capture the runoff and transport it by pipe to the Powell
Road right-of-way where it will be connected to the City of Hopkins stormsewer system, from
which it will be conveyed to a stormwater management basin that the District intends to construct
on its property located at 325 Blake Road, Hopkins (“Western Basin”), and which the District
intends to be operational in 2018.
1.09 The District’s water resource goals will benefit by its taking ownership of the Eastern Basin
and the land underlying and surrounding it (“Basin Lot”), in the following ways:
a. It can expand the Japs-Olson design to treat additional urban runoff from
Meadowbrook Road and other commercial property that presently is discharged to
Minnehaha Creek without treatment.
b. It can enhance the basin design to improve its wetland and ecologic qualities and
integrate the site into the adjacent ecologically restored area on the District property.
c. By assuming maintenance responsibility, it can assure timely maintenance.
d. It can extend public educational and recreational assets onto the land.
1.10 The Parties have assessed the value of considerations to be exchanged under this
Agreement and each determines that the exchange of consideration is fair and beneficial to its
goals. The exchange is as follows:
a. Japs-Olson will (i) adjust the grade of a section of City stormsewer within Meadowbrook
Road and construct an extension of the stormsewer, east beneath its property, to the
Eastern Basin; (ii) construct the Eastern Basin to an expanded design approved by the
District; (iii) convey to the City an easement, which shall include appropriate
indemnifications from the City, to maintain the extension stormsewer beneath its
property; (iv) subdivide the land containing the Eastern Basin to create the Basin Lot; and
(v) convey the Basin Lot to the District in fee.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 6
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
b. The District will: (i) accept Japs-Olson stormwater runoff in both the Western and
Eastern Basins in accordance with plans approved as a part of District Permit No. 15-413,
on an ongoing basis, for as long as Japs-Olson approvals require; and (ii) maintain those
basins to meet all regulatory requirements to which the Project is subject.
c. The City will: (i) accept a grade adjustment in its Meadowbrook Road stormsewer; and
(ii) take ownership of the extension stormsewer extending from Meadowbrook Road to
the outfall at the Eastern Basin.
Accordingly, the Parties agree that this Agreement involves an exchange of valuable
consideration and is legally binding.
1.11 Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §103B.251, the District cannot commit levied funds to
implement its obligations under this Agreement until the District Board of Managers, after due
notice and public hearing, has determined that statutory criteria are met for the District’s
expenditure of funds obtained by levy. If the Board decides not to authorize the expenditure of
funds, in order to allow Japs-Olson to proceed with its redevelopment, this Agreement at
paragraph 3.02 stipulates that Japs-Olson may use the Western Basin in exchange for a fixed fee
payment to the District.
Article 2 - Japs-Olson Construction
2.01 The plans and specifications are attached hereto and incorporated herein as combined
Attachments A and B for the following work:
a. Eastern Basin.
b. Adjusting grade of City stormsewer pipe within Meadowbrook Road and extending a
new section of pipe to an outfall at the Eastern Basin (“Meadowbrook Connection”).
These plans and specifications are a part of the District-approved plans incorporated into District
Permit No. 15-413.
2.02 Japs-Olson is responsible to obtain all approvals required for the Project, including those
of the District and City. The approvals for which Japs-Olson is responsible include, but are not
limited to, the following:
a. Approval from the City of Hopkins of the Powell Road connection to the Hopkins
stormsewer (“Powell Connection”) and the work in right-of-way to construct the
connection.
b. A permit to work in right-of-way and any other approval required from the City to alter
the grade of City stormsewer pipe within Meadowbrook Road and install an extension of
that stormsewer to the Eastern Basin (“Meadowbrook Connection”).
c. City acceptance of ownership of the stormsewer extension to the Eastern Basin to the
point of outfall.
d. Completion of City boundary change with City of Hopkins to incorporate all Project
lands within City boundaries.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 7
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
The District represents that no approval other than District Permit No. 15-413 is required for the
Project as understood. The City reserves all judgment and discretion that it possesses under
approvals not yet issued, but represents that at a staff level of review it is not aware of an issue
that would jeopardize or delay issuance of a required approval. The City will process all remaining
regulatory approvals in good faith and without undue delay.
2.03 The District and the City recognize that the District does not expect the Western Basin to
be operational until 2018, which may be 12 to 18 months after Phase 2 work. Each has considered
this fact within the framework of its regulatory requirements and, as set forth in District Permit
No. 15-413 and the City’s conditional use permit, has determined that this does not prevent its
requirements from being met.
2.04 The Parties will cooperate diligently and in good faith to subdivide one or more Japs-
Olson lots of record in order to establish the Basin Lot, with boundaries materially as shown on
Attachment C, attached hereto and incorporated herein. The Parties will consult in good faith as
to whether the Basin Lot will be established as a lot of record or will be combined with one or
more existing lots of record owned by the District. Either of these is acceptable to the District.
Japs-Olson will obtain required surveys and plats and bear all costs and fees associated with the
subdivision.
2.05 Japs-Olson and the District will cooperate diligently and in good faith to effect the fee
conveyance by limited warranty deed of the Basin Lot in accordance with 2.08.c. Promptly in
conjunction with the execution and delivery of this Agreement, Japs-Olson and the District will
execute a purchase agreement materially equivalent to Attachment D (the “Purchase
Agreement”), attached hereto and incorporated herein. Among other terms, the purchase
agreement provides for title and environmental contingencies and Japs-Olson indemnification of
the District with respect to environmental and regulatory risks associated with the property in
question. Indemnification will extend to all costs, damages and liabilities arising from Japs-Olson
construction of the Project. Time is of the essence so that the conveyance can occur at the time
contemplated by paragraph 2.09, below.
2.06 Japs-Olson will complete construction of the Eastern Basin and the Meadowbrook
Connection in accordance with Exhibits A and B, including but not limited to rough and fine
grading, structures, seeding and other site stabilization as set forth in those exhibits. Japs-Olson
will be responsible for all fill balance associated with basin excavation. However, if there is excess
fill requiring offsite disposal, Japs-Olson may consult with the District to explore excess soil
disposal on District property. Any such disposal will be in accordance with term agreed to by the
parties, including Japs-Olson indemnification for environmental and regulatory risk and an
appropriate sharing of Project cost savings. Japs-Olson will construct the Powell Connection in
accordance with final plans and specifications approved by the District and the City, approval not
to be delayed or unreasonably withheld.
2.07 In its contract documents for the Eastern Basin and Meadowbrook Connection work
specified in Attachments A and B, Japs-Olson will explicitly provide for the following:
a. The District will be named an intended beneficiary.
b. The contractor will indemnify the District and hold it harmless for all claims, costs,
damages and liabilities arising out of the negligence, willful act or contract breach of the
contractor or a subcontractor.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 8
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
c. The contractor will maintain commercial general liability (CGL) insurance on an
occurrence basis with a limit of at least $1.5 million for work and completed operations,
and including contract liability coverage.
d. The District will be named as an additional insured under the contractor’s CGL policy,
with primary and non-contributory coverage, for work and completed operations.
e. The contractor will conform operations to all applicable site contingency plans and
other terms that are conditions of any applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
liability protection letters.
2.08 The District and the City may observe all Eastern Basin and Meadowbrook Connection
construction encompassed by Attachments A and B as well as the Powell Connection. Japs-Olson
will notify the District of all pre-construction and construction meetings, which the District may
attend. The District will not direct the contractor.
2.09 Subject to Force Majeure (as defined in 9.09 below), Japs-Olson will exercise commercially
reasonable efforts to substantially complete the Eastern Basin and Meadowbrook Connection
work specified in Attachments A and B, above, by March 15, 2016. On certification by the Japs-
Olson engineer that this work is complete, City acceptance of the Meadowbrook Connection, and
completion of subdivision, as further defined in Attachment D, the District and Japs Olson will
close on the transaction contemplated by the Purchase Agreement and pursuant to the terms
thereof; ownership of all installed stormsewer from Meadowbrook Road to the outfall at the
Eastern Basin, to the point indicated on Attachment B, will vest in the City; and Japs-Olson will:
a. Provide the District and City as-built drawings for the Eastern Basin and Meadowbrook
Connection signed by a professional engineer and demonstrating conformance to
Attachments A and B.
b. Execute a perpetual utility easement to the City to inspect, maintain, repair and
reconstruct the Meadowbrook Connection.
c. Convey to the District a limited warranty deed for the Basin Lot, reserving the right to
drain stormwater to the basin in accordance with District Permit No. 15-413.
2.10 Japs-Olson may discharge to the Eastern Basin once its engineer has certified completion
and the District notifies Japs-Olson that it is stabilized in accordance with the terms of District
Permit No. 15-413.
Article 3 - Contingency if District Board of Managers Doesn’t Authorize District Participation in
the Project
3.01 The District will provide for notice and a public hearing for its participation in the Project
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §103B.251. After the hearing, the District Board of Managers will
consider a resolution authorizing District participation in the Project pursuant to the criteria
stated in that statute. The Board will act on such a resolution by September 10, 2015, absent
information being brought to its attention during the public process that requires a delay in its
decision.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 9
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
3.02 If the District Board of Managers elects that the District not proceed with its participation
in the Project, Japs-Olson will retain the right to direct its stormwater to the Western Basin in
accordance with District Permit No. 15-413. When the District engineer has certified that the
Western Basin is substantially complete and operational, the District will notify Japs-Olson. Japs-
Olson may discharge stormwater from its property to the basin once it has constructed the Powell
Connection per this Agreement and paid the District the sum of $188,000 and the District has
confirmed that the sum has been credited to the District’s account.
3.03 If received information requires a delay in the Board’s decision under paragraph 3.01,
above, the District and Japs-Olson will coordinate to determine the timing of work under
Attachments A and B and other applicable deadlines set forth herein. The District will use all
diligence to achieve prompt Board action on the resolution and Japs-Olson will make reasonable
adjustments in the work progress to allow for a Board decision in advance of incurring contractor
cost for work under Attachment A or B. If Japs-Olson, after notice to the District, thereafter incurs
contractor cost for such work that is rendered unnecessary by a subsequent Board action not to
proceed, the District will be responsible for such cost, as adequately documented.
Article 4 - Contingency if Japs-Olson Doesn’t Proceed With Project
4.01 If Japs-Olson surrenders a required District or City approval, or such approval expires, in
each case without any construction of hard surface that is jurisdictional under the approval, then
the Parties will deem this Agreement rescinded.
4.02 If Japs-Olson surrenders a required District or City approval, or such approval expires, in
each case after construction of hard surface that is jurisdictional under the approval, Japs-Olson
will be responsible to achieve regulatory compliance with the District and City in their regulatory
functions. If Japs-Olson repudiates or fails to fulfill any obligation under this Agreement, the
District and the City will have remedies in contract pursuant to paragraph 9.02, below.
4.03 Japs-Olson will be responsible to timely apply for extension of required approvals
according to District and City regulations. Those regulations accommodate permit extensions
consistent with the public interest that a development permit not have an indefinite term. Japs-
Olson understands that delay results in opportunity cost to the District with respect to its use of its
property and that the District may find undue delay not to be in the public interest. However, the
District will not deny a permit extension for the reason of this opportunity cost before the five-
year expiration date of this Agreement stated at paragraph 9.08, below.
Article 5 - Contingency if District Doesn’t Proceed to Closing Under Purchase Agreement
5.01 The District and Japs-Olson concur that a fee conveyance of the Basin Lot is the preferred
approach. However, if the District, within its rights under the purchase agreement signed per
paragraph 2.05, above, determines not to proceed to closing on the fee conveyance, Japs-Olson
and the District will cooperate in good faith to promptly negotiate and execute a perpetual
easement that allows the District to fulfill its rights and responsibilities under this Agreement with
respect to the Eastern Basin and the Basin Lot. Such an easement will properly allocate to the
District risks and liabilities with respect to any public facilities on the lot.
Article 6 - Contingency if Cost of Eastern Basin Increases
6.01 Japs-Olson will bid the Project so that the cost of Eastern Basin work is separately defined.
If the contractor establishes the right to a price adjustment that increases the cost of Eastern Basin
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 10
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
work, Japs-Olson and the District will consult in good faith as to a fair apportioning of that part of
the adjusted price exceeding 125 percent of the bid price. As a prerequisite to consultation, Japs-
Olson will give the District notice and fair opportunity to consult on any proposed change order.
6.02 If Japs-Olson elects not to complete the work absent District cost participation per
paragraph 6.01, above, the District may proceed as though the District Board of Managers had
elected not to proceed per paragraph 3.02, above, provided that it agrees to bear equally with
Japs-Olson increased contract costs incurred by Japs-Olson for Eastern Basin work not necessary
to construct the Eastern Basin solely to meet regulatory requirements for Japs-Olson’s own hard
surface. However, if the circumstance causing the price increase arises from an environmental or
structural condition of the Japs-Olson property, the District need not bear a part of such costs.
Article 7 - Contingency if District Fails to Construct Western Basin or Construction is Delayed
7.01 If the Western Basin is not built or is materially delayed, the District is responsible to
provide for alternative stormwater management in place of the Western Basin to meet
stormwater requirements of Japs-Olson approvals for the Project. Japs-Olson and the City will
cooperate in the District’s identification and implementation of an alternative, but will not be
required to bear additional cost beyond ordinary administrative costs.
Article 8 - Basin Maintenance
8.01 Once fee title to the Basin Lot is conveyed to the District per paragraph 2.09.c, Japs-Olson
will not be responsible to maintain the basin or appurtenances. Except for infrastructure owned
by the City, the District will be responsible to maintain the basin and appurtenances in accordance
with requirements of Japs-Olson approvals for the Project. Japs-Olson will remain responsible to
meet regulatory requirements to maintain the parking lot filtration medians and the structures
conveying flow to the Eastern Basin, up to the property boundary.
8.02 Except for infrastructure owned by the City of Hopkins, the District will be responsible to
maintain the Western Basin and appurtenances on the 325 Blake Road property in accordance
with requirements of Japs-Olson approvals for the Project.
8.03 On certification of completion under paragraph 2.09, Japs-Olson will deliver to the
District copies of all approvals referenced under paragraphs 8.01 and 8.02.
Article 9 - Miscellaneous
9.01 The Parties will continue to explore Powell Road relocation or abandonment and other
means to further mutual goals in the Minnehaha Creek riparian area north of the Japs-Olson
facility.
9.02 Only contract remedies are available for a breach of this Agreement. No party will be
liable for special, indirect, incidental, punitive, exemplary or unforeseeable consequential
damages arising out of or in connection with its respective obligations under this Agreement.
Specific performance and quantum meruit explicitly are available remedies for the failure of a
party to perform any obligation hereunder and do not require a demonstration that other
remedies are inadequate. Remedies are non-exclusive.
9.03 Each party agrees to hold harmless, defend and indemnify the other parties from and
against that portion of any and all liability, loss, claim, damage or expense (including reasonable
attorney fees, costs and disbursements) that the indemnified party may incur as a result of the
performance of this Agreement due to any negligent or willful act or omission of the indemnifying
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 11
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
party or its breach of any specific contractual duty. Notwithstanding, this Agreement creates no
right in and waives no immunity, defense or liability limit of the District or City as a public body
under law, with respect to any third party or another party.
9.04 Each notice required under this Agreement will be in writing and made to the following
representatives:
District:
Project Manager, Japs-Olson Project
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
15320 Minnetonka Boulevard
Minnetonka MN 55345
City:
Community Development Director
5005 Minnetonka Blvd
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Japs-Olson:
Japs-Olson Company
1700 Excelsior Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN
Attn.: Robert Murphy
Receipt of notice must be documented. Party representatives will confirm receipt promptly on
request. Contact information will be kept current. A party may change its contact by written
notice to the other parties.
9.05 An amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and executed by the Parties.
9.06 If Japs-Olson conveys any part of the property so as to shift, in whole or part, responsibility
for compliance with District or City approvals for the Project, it will be responsible to timely
request and obtain a transfer of approvals. Among other conditions of transfer, the District and
City likely will require that the transferee accept an assignment of this Agreement, exclusive or
non-exclusive, and of appropriate rights and responsibilities hereunder.
9.07 Venue for any action hereunder is Hennepin County, Minnesota.
9.08 This Agreement is effective on execution by the Parties and will remain in effect for five
years from that date or until all obligations hereunder have been fulfilled, whichever sooner.
Obligations under paragraph 9.03, above, will survive expiration.
9.09 Japs-Olson is not liable for failure to complete the Eastern Basin or Meadowbrook
Connection work specified at Attachments A and B by March 15, 2016, if the failure results from
an Act of God (including fire, flood, earthquake, storm, hurricane, other natural disaster or other
weather conditions that make it infeasible or materially more costly to perform the specified
work), embargo, labor dispute, strike, lockout or interruption or failure of public utility service. In
asserting force majeure, Japs-Olson must demonstrate that it took reasonable steps to minimize
delay and damage caused by foreseeable events, that it substantially fulfilled all non-excused
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 12
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
obligations, and that it timely notified the District and City of the likelihood or actual occurrence
of the force majeure event. Delay will be excused only for the duration of the force majeure.
Agreeing to be bound,
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
Approved for form and execution:
____________________________________
MCWD Counsel
By _________________________________ Date:
Sherry White, President
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By_______________________________________ Date:
Tom Harmening, City Manager
JAPS-OLSON COMPANY
By _______________________________________ Date:
Robert Murphy, Chairman of the Board
Attachments:
Attachment A: Plans & specifications, Eastern Basin
Attachment B: Plans & specifications, Meadowbrook Connection
Attachment C: Boundaries, Basin Lot (legal description or delineation)
Attachment D: Purchase Agreement, Basin Lot
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 13
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
AGREEMENT
Joint Administration of Financial Assurance
for Japs-Olson Company
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City of St. Louis Park
Background
1. This agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District, a watershed district with purposes and powers as set forth at Minnesota Statutes Chapters
103B and 103D (“District”); and the City of St. Louis Park, a charter city and political subdivision of
the State of Minnesota (“City”).
2. Japs-Olson Company owns property located at and contiguous to 7500 Excelsior Boulevard in
the City of St. Louis Park (the “Property”). The District has issued Permit No. 15-413 to Japs-Olson
for redevelopment activity on the Property. The City Council, by Resolution 15-086, has approved
a conditional use permit (CUP) allowing Japs-Olson to undertake the first phase of the two-phase
redevelopment.
3. Permit 15-413 and CUP conditions both require that Japs-Olson supply a financial assurance for
construction of stormwater management facilities. The District and City have agreed to jointly
accept and administer a single letter of credit in order to limit administrative cost and burden.
Terms of Administration
4. The District and the City each reserves its right to approve the letter of credit form and issuer.
At the least, the letter will:
a. Be issued by a surety licensed to issue such a financial assurance in Minnesota;
b. Cite District Permit No. 15-413 and the CUP;
c. Be issued jointly to the District and the City, with an original and originals of all
subsequent extensions and replacement letters issued to the City with a copy to the
District;
d. Allow for multiple draws and be conditioned on construction of the stormwater
management facilities conforming to Permit No. 15-413 and Resolution 15-086;
e. Allow for the District and the City each unilaterally to make draws but otherwise to
preserve to each all of its rights under the letter, with draws by the City subject to the
terms of the CUP;
f. Be irrevocable until XXXXXXX, 201X, or provide for at least 30 days’ notice to each party
for a draw in advance of cancellation or non-renewal.
5. The District or City will advise the other party in writing at least 30 days before initiating a draw,
except pursuant to a notice of cancellation or non-renewal, in which case the advice will be given
as soon after receipt of the notice as possible. At the District’s request, the City promptly will
provide the District the original letter of credit for the purpose of a District draw. At the request
of the other party, the District and City will meet and coordinate in good faith in the draw and the
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 14
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
use of funds obtained thereby for the stormwater facility purposes specified in the CUP and
District Permit 15-413.
6. The District or City will place any funds received from a draw in a separate account, not to be
commingled with other funds, and held in trust for the joint interest of the two parties. All
spending from the account will be documented by standard accounting practices. The City will
apply the funds only for stormwater facility purposes under the CUP. Each party may request an
interim or a final accounting.
7. Except as the District and City may agree in writing, funds from the letter will be used only to
obtain completion of the stormwater facilities in accordance with the plans and specifications
approved as a part of both Permit No. 15-413 and the CUP. The aggregate District draw will not
exceed $17,500.
8. In a final accounting between the District and City of the use of any funds from the letter, funds
will be applied first to any contract costs incurred by the City or the District for construction and
second to documented contract administration costs (internal or professional services) of the
party administering the contract. Remaining funds may be applied to other documented
enforcement, administration, legal and other similar costs relating solely to the stormwater
facilities, incurred by the District and the City in proportion to the documented costs incurred.
Each party has the right to settlement in accordance with the final accounting.
9. Except in making a draw, in any correspondence with Japs-Olson or the issuer concerning the
letter, the District and the City will state that it acts only on its own behalf and not that of the
other party; notwithstanding this provision, the District and City will use their best efforts to
minimize duplication or contradictory messages to Japs-Olson about any item relating to this
Agreement, Permit No. 15-413 or the CUP. Any correspondence to or from Japs-Olson or the
issuer concerning the letter will be copied to the other party.
10. The City will exercise due care in securing the letter of credit and promptly take all steps
necessary to reinstate or replace the letter of credit in the event its negotiability is compromised.
The District and City will cooperate in good faith in all matters relating to the administration of
the letter of credit and use of funds.
General Terms
11. Each party agrees that this Agreement involves an exchange of valuable consideration and is
legally binding and enforceable. Only contract remedies are available for a breach of this
Agreement. Neither party will be liable for special, indirect, incidental, punitive, exemplary or
unforeseeable consequential damages arising out of or in connection with its respective
obligations under this Agreement.
12. The City and the District each agree to hold harmless, defend and indemnify each other from
and against that portion of any and all liability, loss, claim, damage or expense (including
reasonable attorney fees, costs and disbursements) that the indemnified party may incur as a
result of the performance of this Agreement due to any negligent act or omission of the
indemnifying party or any other act or omission that subjects it to liability in law or equity.
Notwithstanding, this Agreement creates no right in and waives no immunity, defense or liability
limit of the District or City as a public body under law, with respect to any third party or the other
party to this Agreement. This Agreement is not a joint powers agreement under Minnesota
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4j) Page 15
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project
Statutes §471.59 and nothing herein constitutes a party’s agreement to be responsible for the acts
or omissions of the other party pursuant to subdivision 1(a) of that statute.
13. Each communication under this Agreement will be made to the following:
District:
Permitting Department
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
15320 Minnetonka Boulevard
Minnetonka MN 55345
Re: Japs-Olson Company, Permit No. 15-413
City:
St. Louis Park City Hall
Community Development Department
5005 Minnetonka Blvd
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Contact information will be kept current. A party may change its contact by written notice to the
other party.
14. This Agreement incorporates all terms and understandings of the parties. An amendment to
this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the parties. This Agreement is effective on
execution by the parties and until XXXXX, 201X.
MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT
Approved for form and execution:
____________________________________
MCWD Counsel
By _________________________________ Date:
Its President
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By _________________________________ Date:
Its City Manager
APPROVED PLAN
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2014 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project Page 16
PROPOSED PLAN
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2014 (Item No. 4j)
Title: Joint Minnehaha Creek Watershed District/Japs-Olson Stormwater Project Page 17
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4k
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Acceptance of Donation from the American Legion to the Fire Department
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting a $1500 Donation from
the American Legion Post 282 for the purchase of equipment to support the new Fire Department
Honor Guard.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept this donation with the
restrictions on its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended. In this case, the donation is to be used for
equipment and materials such as flags, axes, uniform accents etc.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used for the purchase
of materials and equipment that support the Honor Guard activities.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Steve Koering, Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: Acceptance of Donation from the American Legion to the Fire Department
RESOLUTION NO. 15-_____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF
A $1500 DONATION TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT
FROM AMERICAN LEGION POST 282
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donations
by the donors; and
WHEREAS, this donation will be directed toward the Fire Department Honor Guard;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that this $1500 donation is hereby accepted with thanks and appreciation.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4l
OFFICIAL MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2015
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
6:00 p.m.
The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a meeting on May 28, 2015, at St. Louis
Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota – Council Chambers.
Members Present: James Gainsley, Justin Kaufman, Paul Roberts, Henry Solmer
Members Absent: Susan Bloyer
Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Nancy Sells, Administrative Secretary
1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 24, 2014
Commissioner Solmer made a motion to approve the minutes of July 24, 2014. The
motion passed on a vote of 3-0. (note: Commissioner Kaufman arrived at 6:05 p.m.)
3. CONSENT AGENDA: None
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Variance: Floor Area Ratio
Location: 5305 Parkdale Drive
Applicant: St. Louis Park Properties, Mr. Todd Jones Chief Mgr.
Case No. 15-18-VAR
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He explained
that the applicant is in the process of remodeling an industrial building into an indoor
self-storage facility. The applicant would like to construct a second floor inside the
building. The 0.5 FAR maximum, however, limits how much of the building can be
improved with a second floor. The applicant is requesting a 0.2 increase to the allowed
0.5 maximum floor area ratio. If approved, the variance would allow the applicant to
construct a second floor throughout the building.
Mr. Morrison reviewed zoning code regulations regarding Floor Area Ratio within the I-
P (Industrial Park) District.
Mr. Morrison reviewed staff findings for variance criteria.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4l) Page 2
Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2015
As regards whether or not the request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent
of the Zoning Ordinance, he stated that an increase of FAR to 0.7 is not in harmony with
the intent of the ordinance. He stated that all properties in the I-P district are required to
maintain a FAR less than 0.5. The request to exceed the maximum would give the
applicant more rentable floor area than allowed at any other property in the district.
Mr. Morrison said staff is unable to determine that a practical difficulty exists to prevent
conformance with the 0.5 FAR.
Mr. Morrison said staff has not been able to find unique circumstances applying to the
property that would require increase in FAR.
Mr. Morrison stated that the 0.5 maximum FAR does not prohibit reasonable use of the
property. The building has had reasonable use since construction, and the applicant is in
the process of renovating it into a self-storage facility that meets the 0.5 FAR.
Mr. Morrison said a practical difficulty does not exist that would require a FAR greater
than allowed by City Code and applied to other properties in the district. The applicant
has reasonable use of the property, and has already begun construction of that use. He
said it appears that the request would result in a convenience that would allow more
rentable floor area.
Mr. Morrison stated that based on the review, staff is recommending a motion to adopt a
resolution denying the requested variance.
Commissioner Kaufman asked for additional background as to criteria regarding whether
or not a request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the zoning
ordinance as it relates to FAR.
Mr. Morrison responded that FAR addresses building bulk, height, and traffic. He added
that it also addresses a level playing field; all properties have a certain amount of floor
area to work with.
Commissioner Kaufman asked for an example of a unique circumstance.
Mr. Morrison answered that typically in looking at unique circumstances with a variance
request it is easier to point one out that applies to setbacks because the shape of the
property comes into play or maybe the property is impacted by a wetland. He said in the
current request the property is approximately 2.95 acres in size, plenty of area to
construct a building that does meet the FAR requirement. Staff has been unable to come
up with something related to the property that is unique to that property that would
require it to have a higher FAR than other properties in that zoning district.
Commissioner Solmer inquired as to the zoning and desired use in the West End area.
He asked what desired uses might be.
Mr. Morrison said the property is guided Industrial and is zoned Industrial Park. He said
uses that are anticipated include multi-family, office or MX-Mixed Use.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4l) Page 3
Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2015
Commissioner Roberts asked how something is categorized as a practical difficulty.
Mr. Morrison said staff looks specifically at the request, asking what would justify going
from a 0.5 to a 0.7. What kind of practical difficulties exist to justify that increase. He
said typically when looking at a variance one argues that the property owner does not
have reasonable use of the property without a variance. He said in this case staff cannot
come to a conclusive answer to be able to say to the board that this variance is needed for
this property to have a reasonable use. He said it has had a reasonable use since it was
built. Staff has not been able to come up with a practical difficulty, something unique to
this property that is preventing them from having reasonable use. He added that variance
requests are reviewed by the entire Planning Department.
Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
Todd Jones, Jacobs Management and St. Louis Park Properties, LLC, applicant, said they
are very pleased to be moving forward with the construction of the project. He said they
believe it will be an excellent location for the company, residents and small businesses of
St. Louis Park. He said there is no question that there is significant demand for this
product in St. Louis Park. He said if the demand is not satisfied in St. Louis Park
additional storage facilities will be developed elsewhere in the market.
Mr. Jones stated St. Louis Park has an IP District, which allows 0.5 FAR, and it has an IG
District which allows FAR of 1.0. He said across the street 1.0 is allowed. His company
is asking for 0.7, which is in-between.
Mr. Jones discussed construction plans. He said the expansion would be within the
existing envelope. The request is not to expand the exterior or the footprint but to expand
the building floor area utilizing only the space within the existing building envelope. He
said plans would significantly reduce the present hardcover on the site.
Mr. Jones discussed the business. He said most of the customers come from a one to two
mile radius. He said 25 % of their customers are small business owners in the
community. He said the use is a very low industrial use and the lowest generator of
traffic. Mr. Jones said the company is local and has developed properties nationally for
over 25 years. He distributed before and after photographs of several properties the
company has developed.
Mr. Jones stated that the building is a bit of an oddball. The north building was built as a
separate building in 1960 with frontage on Parkdale Dr. The south building has frontage
on Cedar Lake Road. Forty years later a company gained control of both buildings and
they built a middle building in 1999 which connects all the buildings together. He said
the building isn’t impossible but very difficult with different floor elevations, different
roof elevations, and different ceiling heights. He said there are a series of ramps tying the
buildings together internally. He stated that these conditions are very unique to this
property. It makes it very difficult for any use to go in there. Mr. Jones said they found a
way to do it as they have flexibility with their product type.
Mr. Jones discussed exterior improvements which will coincide with the interior floor
expansion. These include reduction of hardcover on site to be replaced with a rain garden
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4l) Page 4
Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2015
and significant landscape design. The rain garden would control rate and quality of
stormwater discharged from the site. An interior drive-through loading area is also
included in the expansion. The north and south building facades will be enhanced and
updated with contemporary design. Mr. Jones distributed photographs of similar
conversion projects the company has completed.
Mr. Jones said the request is not all about economic gain. He said it is a feasible project.
It is going forward. They want to provide the best development plan possible for the
benefit of everybody. He said he has discussed the plan with many neighbors in the
community. They all support it and cannot imagine the variance request not being
approved. He said the company has one opportunity to do the project right.
William Griffith, Larkin Hoffman Attorneys, representing the applicant, discussed the
criteria regarding reasonability. He said the Minnesota Courts have said “Is the applicant
proposing something that is reasonable in light of the locality, impact on neighbors and
impact on infrastructure?” Mr. Griffith said the applicant submits that it is a reasonable
proposal. In regards to the rational basis of FAR and is it negatively impacted by granting
a variance, Mr. Griffith submits that generally the purpose is to control bulk, height,
density, intensity of use to as not to burden the public infrastructure and over burden the
surrounding neighbors. Mr. Griffith said he did not believe the purpose of zoning is to
regulate economics. He asked is the zoning ordinance undermined by granting what the
applicant feels is a modest variance. He said the answer has to be no, based on staff’s
own findings.
Mr. Griffith said regarding reasonability, the variance would create no impact on
surrounding properties. The additional site enhancements would improve the property
and be upgraded for the area. Mr. Griffith said storage center uses are the lowest trip
generating uses.
Mr. Griffith said he wanted to read four positive findings about the use found in the staff
report. He read those findings.
In summary Mr. Griffith asked why grant the variance? Mr. Griffith said the proposed
use is reasonable. Mr. Griffith discussed the unique circumstances. He said to not grant
the variance wastes the opportunity to maximize this use in this location. If the city does
not want to see the use proliferated then why would it deny a variance that would
maximize the use without impacting neighbors? He discussed the service provided to the
community.
Mr. Griffith discussed the zoning rationale for FAR. He stated the rationale basis for
FAR is not undermined by a modest increase from 0.5 to 0.7.
Commissioner Roberts said practical difficulty was mentioned in the attorney’s letter
multiple times. He asked Mr. Griffith to comment.
Mr. Griffith said the applicant finds the practical difficulty is having an industrial
building with this configuration. Because it is not generally amenable for typical
industrial use or industrial park, to make the best use of the building under the 0.5 FAR
creates a practical difficulty in re-using the building. Construction is already underway
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4l) Page 5
Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2015
for a storage center. How do you best use the building? And is the proposal for best use
of building reasonable in light of the circumstances and what is that impact on others?
And that is part of the practical difficulty finding. Mr. Griffith said that is in case law.
Commissioner Kaufman asked Mr. Griffith if he was saying the practical difficulty lies
with the nature of the property, not of the applicant’s making.
Mr. Griffith said that was correct.
Commissioner Solmer asked if any of the projects the company has developed involved
an increase in the FAR.
Mr. Jones said no variances were required.
The Chair closed the public hearing as no one else was present wishing to speak.
Mr. Solmer asked about the potential buyer for the property proposing retail development
who was discouraged by the city from going forward.
Mr. Morrison said a proposal was brought forward for a one-story strip mall.
Commissioner Kaufman asked if that proposal was for a tear down.
Mr. Morrison responded that it was for a tear down.
Commissioner Kaufman stated if the issue for the FAR is bulk, height and traffic with no
effect on surrounding area, that sways him a little bit. He said his other concern regards
the difficulty with a three building connection and using the property as it is, as opposed
to a tear down.
Commissioner Roberts said those were his concerns too. The FAR is 3 of the 4 things
staff mentioned. He said the one thing he is hung up on is the fairness of everyone having
to comply with the 0.5 FAR in that zoning district and if there is unfair advantage there.
He said he could be persuaded either way.
Chair Gainsley said the applicant is given a very wide latitude with the 0.5 FAR and is
being given just about everything in the way of reasonable use and there is really no
hardship. The building is there, the space is there and it is being used to its fullest
capacity, using it reasonably, and will make money with it. Chair Gainsley said he
doesn’t see there is any particular problem with the project and doesn’t see any reason to
have a variance. He said he doesn’t see a practical difficulty that would be of such an
immediate need that a variance would be warranted.
Commissioner Kaufman asked if the bar for practical difficulty was so that high that the
property could not be used but for the variance?
Mr. Morrison answered that it used to be that high. He said there is a little more
discretion in the recent statute changes. Reasonable use is still part of the consideration.
Can this property be used as it is? Yes, it can. He said the Novartis property is a primary
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4l) Page 6
Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of May 28, 2015
example of that as it was built in several stages with uneven floors and that is not
uncommon in St. Louis Park. These buildings are old and have been added on to. And
they are being re-used. The Novartis building was snatched up immediately and is almost
fully complete and almost fully occupied.
Commissioner Solmer stated that by allowing the requested variance, the board would be
letting the developer push the city into a different direction long-term for the use of this
land than the city has currently planned.
Chair Gainsley made a motion to deny the variance request based on the staff report. The
motion failed on a vote of 2-2. (Gainsley and Solmer voting to deny; Kaufman and
Roberts voting against motion to deny).
Commissioner Kaufman made a motion to approve the variance. The motion failed on a
vote of 2-2. (Kaufman and Roberts voting to approve; Gainsley and Solmer voting
against motion to approve).
Mr. Morrison read the statement regarding appeal to the City Council.
5. Unfinished Business
6. New Business
A. Election of Officers
Commissioner Roberts nominated Justin Kaufman for Chair.
Chair Gainsley remarked that Justin Kaufman had not yet served five years.
Chair Gainsley nominated Paul Roberts for Chair. The motion passed on a vote
of 4-0.
Chair Gainsley nominated Justin Kaufman for Vice-Chair. The motion passed on
a vote of 4-0.
7. Communications
8. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item:4m
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JULY 15, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer,
Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Ethan Rickert
(youth member)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Tatalovich
STAFF PRESENT: Julie Grove, Ryan Kelley, Sean Walther
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of June 3, 2015
Commissioner Carper moved approval of the minutes of June 3, 2015. Commissioner
Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Kramer
abstained; Robertson arrived 6:03 p.m.)
3. The Shoreham TIF District Plan – Conformity with Comprehensive Plan
Resolution No. 86
Julie Grove, Economic Development Specialist, presented the staff report. Ms. Grove
provided background on Bader Development’s proposed plans to construct a mixed-use
redevelopment at the SW corner of CSAH 25 and France Ave.
Commissioner Robertson stated that the request is very straightforward. He noted the
Planning Commission is very familiar with the developer’s plans for the site. He made a
motion to adopt Resolution No. 86 finding the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the
proposed Shoreham Tax Increment Financing District to be in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan of the City of St. Louis Park. Commissioner Kramer seconded the
motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
4. Hearings
A. Cityscape Apartments – Special (Conditional) Use Permit Major Amendment and
Variance
Location: 5707 Highway 7
Applicant: Bel Minneapolis Holdings LLC
Case No.: 15-24-SP and 15-25-VAR
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, presented the staff report. He explained
that in June 2014, MN DOT condemned in fee simple 1,066 square feet from the
Cityscape Apartments parcel in connection with Highway 7 improvements. The applicant
has requested a Special Use Permit Major Amendment and variances in order to ensure
and document that the taking doesn’t harm the legal status of the property due to the
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4m) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of July 15, 2015
resulting lot size reduction. Mr. Walther said there are no proposed changes to the site
by the applicant.
Mr. Walther stated that the site meets all of the conditions allowing multiple-family use
in the R-4 District, including the conditions specific to the site.
Mr. Walther reviewed the two variance requests relating to increase in density and
increase in floor area ratio. He discussed the variance criteria and staff findings for the
requests. He stated that staff finds the application meets the criteria for granting the
variances from 30 to 36 units per acre residential density and from 0.7 to 1.0 floor area
ratio.
Jennifer Madden, Eaton Vance Management, applicant, thanked staff and Commission
for their review of the request.
The Chair opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak he closed
the public hearing.
Commissioner Kramer made a motion to recommend approval of the Major Amendment
to the Special (Conditional) Use Permit and variances for 5707 Highway 7 subject to
conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the
motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
5. Other Business
Mr. Walther noted a study session would follow the meeting.
6. Communications
Chair Person remarked he had received correspondence from Source Water Solutions
about an upcoming meeting on the city Wellhead Protection Plan Update, Municipal
Service Center, Aug. 6, at 6 p.m.
7. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
A Study Session followed the regular meeting. Proposal for developments along Wayzata Blvd.
at 13th Lane and also near Texas Ave. were discussed, as well as several other development
updates.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4n
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 5, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Richard Person, Carl
Robertson, Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer, Lisa Peilen
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Meg McMonigal
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of July 15, 2015
Commissioner Robertson moved approval of the minutes of July 15, 2015. Chair Person
seconded the motion and the motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Tatalovich abstained).
3. Public Hearings
A. Amendment to Comprehensive Plan – Business Park to Mixed Use
Location: 4601 State Hwy. 7, 4725 State Hwy. 7, 3130 Monterey Ave. S.
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 15-28-CP
Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. She stated that the
property is located just adjacent to the SWLRT station at Beltline. She said staff have
worked on station area planning for the past five years and have looked at changing the
property from Business Park, which is essentially light industrial and office, to a mixed
use designation which allows a combination of residential, office and commercial uses.
She said the current Municipal Consent plans for SWLRT show a surface parking lot on
the Vision Bank site for Park and Ride. Recently the surface lot was reduced from 541 to
268 spaces. She explained that ideally this area would not be a surface parking lot on a
prominent corner that is somewhat of a gateway to the Beltline Station area. She
discussed work with the Metropolitan Council and the SWLRT Project Office on a
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) program called “Joint Development.” It includes
the three properties plus the city right-of-way. Parking in a ramp could be surrounded
with development (park and ride and development parking) to get some efficiency in the
development. The idea is to be transit oriented and mixed use.
Ms. McMonigal said as part of the Joint Development program the FTA has asked the
city to change the Comprehensive Plan to demonstrate the mixed use development that
has been discussed. She described how the amendment is consistent with many of the
Comprehensive Plan goals.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4n) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2015
Commissioner Carper asked if the city currently owns 4601 State Hwy. 7 and 3130
Monterey Ave.
Ms. McMonigal responded those two properties are owned by the city’s Economic
Development Authority (EDA).
Commissioner Carper asked if in the future the site would be similar to the Excelsior &
Grand public parking ramp surrounded by retail, apartments and condos.
Ms. McMonigal said the idea is to incorporate a ramp into the development. She said the
Met Council is working towards acquiring the Vision Bank property. Depending on how
it is acquired it may need to be for parking. Potentially it could be wrapped with some
development. She said the other possibility would be the three properties would work
together to have parking that is not as visible, with the prime corner used for a
development site.
Commissioner Tatalovich asked about the potential for Hwy. 7 to change into a more
Excelsior Blvd. type road and move away from the 4-lane divided highway model. He
said if that is the case would developers of the Vision Bank site know that ahead of time?
Would they have more room to go north and bring it closer to the street?
Ms. McMonigal responded that staff is starting to work on a concept plan for County 25,
where it would be similar to Excelsior Blvd. She said it is twice as wide as Excelsior
Blvd. so a 4-lane configuration could remain without using up all the land with frontage
roads. .
She said probably in the next six months staff will try to develop concept plans. She said
the Met Council recently put a large sewer pipe under the south frontage road so there are
some limitations to how far north development could be built. She said the property could
be used for other public purposes such as trail or stormwater.
Chair Person asked if there would be access across the parcel to the station.
Ms. McMonigal responded that staff is working on a plan that would extend Lynn Ave.
and build a road for access and to create blocks that are easier to develop.
Chair Person asked about a pedestrian bridge crossing the rail right-of-way.
Ms. McMonigal spoke about the planned bridge over the railroad tracks and the
possibility of the bridge extending over Beltline.
The Chair opened the public hearing. He closed the public hearing as there was no one
present wishing to speak.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the Comprehensive
Plan Amendment. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on
a vote of 5-0.
4. Other Business
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4n) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2015
Ethan Rickert said his term as a youth commissioner is almost up. He said he has
enjoyed his time and hopes to continue on the Commission.
5. Communications
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, spoke about upcoming agenda items.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:18 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Sr. Office Assistant
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Consent Agenda Item: 4o
OFFICIAL MINUTES
ST. LOUIS PARK TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
MEETING OF MAY 13, 2015
ST. LOUIS PARK COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Maren Anderson, Bruce Browning, Dale Hartman, Cindy Hoffman,
and Toby Keeler
MEMBERS ABSENT: Rolf Peterson and Andrew Reinhardt
STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator; Jacque Larson, Communications
and Marketing Manager; Jason Huber, IT Manager
OTHERS PRESENT: Patrick Haggerty, CenturyLink and Karly Werner, Comcast Cable
1. Call to Order
Chair Browning called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM.
2. Roll Call
Present at roll call were Commissioners Anderson, Browning, Hartman, Hoffman and
Keeler.
3. Approval of Minutes for February 15, 2015
It was moved by Commissioner Anderson, seconded by Commissioner Keeler, to approve
the minutes of February 15, 2015, without changes.
The motion passed 5-0.
4. Adoption of Agenda
Mr. Dunlap added item 6f, Comcast Price Adjustments.
It was moved by Commissioner Keeler, seconded by Commissioner Anderson, to approve
the agenda as amended.
The motion passed 5-0.
5. Public Comment
Guests in attendance introduced themselves.
6. New Business
A. Update about Public Stuff and City apps
Mr. Dunlap introduced Jason Huber, IT Manager.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4o) Page 2
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of May 13, 2015
Mr. Huber discussed mystlouispark.org and Public Stuff was the name of the vendor. A
video was shown from the vendor introducing mystlouispark. This is used by city
residents to report problems to city staff and is a customer response management system.
Citizens receive email/phone call updates and can track the request through the entire
process. This helps close the communication loop. There are four phases to every
request: 1) Citizen submits complaint and there is customer confirmation and Email
tracking; 2) The complaint is received, Email is sent and staff will review the request, ask
questions, and get feedback; 3) In progress. Email notification that staff is working to
solve issues, there can be comments and progress added throughout process and answer
questions and concerns; 4) Completion. Email sent notifying the citizen.
There are privacy settings and only the requester and city staff can see the information.
There is a sensitive setting for police issues and other city staff cannot see the
information. The requester can chose to make it private or can also be anonymous.
Requests come in many ways, but mainly built around the mobile app available for either
Apple or Android operating systems. There are other features to the App including:
nearby requests, elected Officials contact information, staff director, construction
updates, Hydrant Hero and links to Facebook, Twitter, job openings and more. Requests
can also be submitted through the mystlouispark.org city website, via phone call or email
(info@stlouispark.org), walk in and social media (Facebook and Twitter). The city can
also push out alerts to residents, for example if there is a snow emergency.
The soft launch was July 2014, where the software was running and mobile app available,
but not advertised. In August 2014, National Night Out was the first push and they
handed out information, then social media, Park Perspective and post cards. To date,
1020 requests have come in, and the the last two months averaged 120. They received a
bit over 2000 comments working through the requests. Public Works and Streets had the
highest amount of requests followed by the Park Board. The majority of requests are
done through the web site because that’s how staff enters phone calls or walk ins. They
have had about 220 requests through the mobile app.
Chair Browning asked how many people have signed up for this? Mr. Huber replied
about 400. They are handing information out about Mystlouispark at neighborhood
meetings.
Commissioner Keeler verified that this worked because he used it a few weeks ago to
notify utilities department of excessive running water in a storm drain and it turned out to
be a broken water main. The workers said he should have called that one in because we
probably lost 200,000 gallons of water overnight.
B. Review City web site for “next generation” changes
Chair Browning noted that he liked the web page and thought it was easy to use.
Mr. Huber stated they have continued to improve the search functions.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4o) Page 3
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of May 13, 2015
C. Comcast franchise transfer request withdrawn
Mr. Dunlap noted nothing would be changing and Comcast will continue operating the
cable system here and Greatland Connections has not been created. A positive outcome
of the transfer was that the city hired outside expertise to review the transfer and do a
franchise fee audit. Both of those were settled and Comcast has already paid the money
to reimburse the City.
D. CenturyLink intent to franchise
Mr. Dunlap indicated that notice was published in the Sun Sailor on May 14th and the
next will be May 21 st. CenturyLink has 240,000 customers nationally and seeks a
franchise to offer video services in the Twin Cities. The City of Minneapolis is leading
the way and on May 15th will consider a CenturyLink franchise. State law requires a
city-wide roll out within five years, and that’s something CenturyLink won’t agree to do.
CenturyLink believes FCC rules preempt MN statute, and litigation is expected to decide
this. Staff has been directed by City Council to move ahead with franchise negotiations.
He has a time line laid out of the deadlines to note.
He requested volunteers to join a sub committee to make a recommendation to City
Council. He saw the presentation at the City of Minneapolis and it was very informative.
CenturyLink will make a presentation to the City Council at a public hearing on July 6, to
explain their application and answer questions. In August or September the Council will
decide whether or not to accept the proposed franchise. Minneapolis is the first
community that will vote on the franchise and that outcome may impact what happened
here.
Chair Browning asked if there was litigation regarding the FCC statute versus the
Minnesota statute, were they responsible for the costs involved? Mr. Dunlap replied if
none of the other cities became involved and St. Louis Park takes action and comes up
with a franchise signed with CenturyLink in August as proposed, then it’s possible we’d
be involved in litigation. The strategy was not to be the first community involved. One
third of the local franchise authorities are pretty deep into this and St. Louis Park was
moving more slowly. Other communities were not involved at all.
Patrick Haggerty, Centurylink, stated that two-thirds of communities are working on this,
and they have attended 42 public hearings so far. They anticipate if the outcome in
Minneapolis is positive, then more will happen quickly. He clarified that they fully
intend to offer full indemnification in the process if there was litigation. They are
confident in their belief that the FCC order preempted the MN Statute about level playing
field and build out mandates.
Chair Browning asked if they have to have a minimum 25 megabit/second service to get
Prism TV, that the phone lines may need to be groomed to reach that speed, and one of
the partial roll outs is for gigabit service--can they deliver 1 gig service on telephone
lines? Mr. Haggerty replied their initial announcement was to bring a significant
investment to deploy gig networks and that was the catalyst to bring forward the Prism
product, which wasn’t new to CenturyLink, it’s offered in 14 markets across the country.
They deploy Prism across two different types of network architectures; the first is the one
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4o) Page 4
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of May 13, 2015
gig fiber to the home. They have to build fiber to the home in a shorter period than the
old copper system was built, so adding the video product to the bundle allows them to
capitalize on that build. This will be the stair step that gets fiber to the home. We use an
oversimplification to talk about the Prism product over the existing copper lines, that if a
resident receives at least 25-megabit download speeds today, that would translate to
being qualified for the Prism product. The copper needs to be groomed to be pristine to
support the video content—it works fine for voice and data.
Commissioner Keeler asked if they come to a franchise agreement in September, when
would service be available to residents? Mr. Haggerty responded as soon as the
ordinance was codified, they could begin offering service to enable homes. Based on the
25 megabit download speeds, there are homes that qualify for it.
Commissioner Keeler asked if they know the particular areas? Mr. Dunlap replied
Centurylink has a map of the areas first served by the one gig service and could receive it
quickly. The map is considered proprietary. But a part of the application process will be
for Commissioners and the City Council to review the maps.
Mr. Haggerty described the contradiction with State Statute. When the FCC investigated
competition in the cable market, one of the things they recognized was the impediment of
the unreasonable requirements of local franchise authorities to build out. That was where
the MN state law enacted in 1970 ran into a conflict with the 2007 FCC order that these
build out requirements are a barrier to entry for a second entrant into the cable market.
CenturyLink proposes to come in with an initial threshold build and allow them to
determine if they can be successful in the market and if they achieve that, they then are
under obligation to build out another percentage. With zero customers, it gives them the
idea to find out if they can compete because it is a significant investment and there are
risks. They do have maps and want to be transparent and share information. Where they
run into the challenge is that the map is very specific and advantageous for the competitor
to have. They have no problem doing it outside of a public forum, but don’t want to
share it publicly.
Chair Browning said that with Comcast’s architecture, if more people use a node, there is
an impact on speeds. Is that the case with CenturyLink’s system? Mr. Haggerty replied
that their DSL service provides individual circuits and are not shared bandwidth. Prism
uses that same infrastructure and it is your own circuit.
Mr. Dunlap asked what other cities were close to negotiating a franchise with
CenturyLink? Mr. Haggerty replied four cable commissions are ready to go and are
waiting to see what happens in Minneapolis. He believed they would be prepared to act
after that point. Some of those commissions can approve the franchise and it doesn’t
need to go to their city council for approval.
Mr. Dunlap asked if they were expecting customers on June 1st.
Mr. Haggerty responded this is a significant undertaking and investment. They have the
head end in place in Golden Valley and are bringing in content from the super head end
in Columbia, Missourri. They have a number of employees currently receiving the
service in their home. As soon as they can offer it, they will be acquiring customers.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4o) Page 5
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of May 13, 2015
E. Complaints
Chair Browning stated some were handled satisfactorily, which is great, but he was
curious about a couple of instances where they had trouble communicating with the
customer service representatives. He had to contact customer service and the person was
in the Philippines and couldn’t diagnose the issue and suggested a service call. In the
process they tried to up-sell during the call multiple times. He also did a chat and the
same thing happened. He found it a little aggressive. It turned out to not be a Comcast
problem, which he later found out when he reset everything. He asked if they were still
working on having separate entities for separate problem areas?
Ms. Werner stated that customer service has been front and center and they know they
need to look at it. Many customers do have great experiences. They are putting a
significant amount of investment into customer service. They will be hiring 5,000 new
customer service agents in the U.S. There will be three new call centers built in the next
couple of years. They take it very seriously.
Chair Browning asked how much capability do they have to trouble shoot when it is
answered over seas? Mr. Werner replied they can trouble shoot some problems, but
transfer to other groups who have the tools to that handle problem. They have moved to
a COE model several years ago, where one group has experts in billing problems and
another in repairs, because the questions can get very detailed, instead of generalist.
We’re still settling into that but we believe that’s the way to go.
Chair Browning in multiple dwelling unit, if someone loses a phone line, if they contact
customer service to set up a call and if the problem is in the person’s apartment or condo,
there is a charge involved. If there is a central point that distributes cable to the multiple
units in the complex, and the problem lies in that area, would the customer be expected to
pay something for that call? Ms. Werner replied if there were an issue going into the
MDU, no, she would not expect a charge to the customer if it is outside of their unit.
They are able to walk many customers through fixing the problem on their own for the
most part and that saves a truck roll and the cost associated with that.
Chair Browning said that he attended the opening of the Xfinity store on Excelsior
Boulevard, that it’s a very nice store and hopes it can help with these things. Ms. Werner
noted they were excited about the store and the team is great.
Ms. Werner thanked Mayor Jacobs and Councilmember Mavity who were part of
Comcast Cares day at Perspectives a few weeks ago. There were over 2,000 volunteers
out that day. She noted that they would have some great announcements coming soon
about speed roll outs.
F. Comcast Price Adjustments
Mr. Dunlap showed a slide with the new fees that hadn’t been charged in the past that
some people might not be aware of. June 1st there will be a broadcast TV fee for
$1.50/month for basic subscribers and above, which means everybody who receives cable
TV. There is a new regional sports fee of $1/month for people with digital starter and
above. There is also an increase on the digital adapter outlet service, which is $1 more
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 4o) Page 6
Title: Telecommunications Commission Meeting Minutes of May 13, 2015
per month. HD DVR service that will go up $2/month. One of the packages for basic
TV and performance internet will go up $3/month. Customers could see increase of
$5.50-6.25 per month, depending on how many of these services you have. These prices
won’t apply to those locked in on promotional agreements or contracts. This information
is available on the city web site at parktv.org. These are all deregulated services.
Chair Browning thought the timing seemed weird because it is usually done at the end of
the year.
Ms. Werner said they are the last market to do the broadcast TV fee and regional sports
fee increases. They do tend to have increases on an annual basis. Their programming
costs are the biggest cost to their business. The retransmission and programming fees
have been going up at a rapid pace and have doubled in the last few years. Typically
those increases would be wrapped into the basic service and they hadn’t done an increase
on January 1st. This is trying to be more transparent to reflect the rapidly increasing costs
of carrying that programming.
Chair Browning asked if the regional sports fee was being applied to people who have
basic service? Ms. Werner replied no, that fee is for digital starter and above because
that’s where those channels were carried.
Commissioner Hoffman asked how much the installation fee had gone up and if that was
due to costs? Mr. Dunlap replied some of the charges have gone down as well and some
of the installation fees have decreased, which was good news.
7. Communications from the Chair, Commissioners and City staff
Chair Browning said it would be an interesting few months, and he could join the sub
committee for the Centurylink franchise discussion.
Commissioner Keeler reminded commissioners of the MACTA annual meeting, which
will be June 16th at the U of M Agricultural campus. He also volunteered for the sub
committee.
Mr. Dunlap mentioned he hadn’t had a chance to edit, but eventually the cable audience
can see a tour of the new facility.
8. Adjournment
Commissioner Keeler made a motion, Commission Hartman seconded to adjourn at 7:57.
The motion passed.
Respectfully submitted by:
Amy L. Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Authorizing the 2016 Preliminary
HRA Levy.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council desire to continue to levy the full
0.0185% of estimated market value allowable for HRA purposes of $1,011,208, which is an
increase of $57,970, to assist in paying for infrastructure improvements in redeveloping areas?
SUMMARY: This levy was originally implemented in St. Louis Park due to legislative changes
in 2001 which significantly reduced future tax increment revenues. The City Council elected at
that time to use the levy proceeds for future infrastructure improvements in redevelopment areas.
Thus far some of the HRA Levy proceeds have been used to fund infrastructure studies, analyses
for future improvement projects, and are currently paying for the City’s share of Highway 7 and
Louisiana. By law, these funds could also be used for other housing and redevelopment
purposes, but they are committed to funding Highway 7 and Louisiana until 2021 based on the
current Long Range Financial Management Plan. Given the significant infrastructure needs
facing the City in the future, staff recommends the HRA Levy continue at the maximum allowed
by law for the 2016 budget year. The HRA Levy cannot exceed 0.0185% of the estimated
market value of the City. Therefore, staff has calculated the maximum HRA Levy for 2016 to be
$1,011,208 based on valuation data from Hennepin County. This is an increase of $57,970 or
6.08% from 2015.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed levy will help support
infrastructure in redevelopment areas and possible future affordable housing initiatives.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: 2016 Preliminary HRA Levy Certification
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PRELIMINARY HRA LEVY FOR 2016
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA
Act”), the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority (the "Authority"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the EDA Act, the City Council granted to the Authority all of
the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the
Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and
WHEREAS, Section 469.033, subdivision 6 of the Act authorizes the Authority to levy a
tax upon all taxable property within the City to be expended for the purposes authorized by the
HRA Act; and
WHEREAS, such levy may be in an amount not to exceed 0.0185 percent of estimated
market value of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has filed its budget for the special benefit levy in accordance
with the budget procedures of the City in the amount of $1,011,208; and
WHEREAS, based upon such budgets the Authority will levy all or such portion of the
authorized levy as it deems necessary and proper;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the St. Louis Park City Council:
1. That approval is hereby given for the Authority to levy, for taxes payable in 2016,
such tax upon the taxable property of the City as the Authority may determine, subject to the
limitations contained in the HRA Act.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) to export approximately 7,000 cubic yards of material, subject to conditions
recommended by staff.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the proposed CUP meet the conditions of the Zoning
Ordinance?
SUMMARY: The applicant is the City of St. Louis Park, and it is requesting the removal of the
material to facilitate the construction of the proposed outdoor recreation complex to be
constructed on the west side of the Recreation Center.
A CUP is required by the zoning ordinance when more than 400 cubic yards is removed from a
property.
Excavation Details:
Duration of exporting activity: Five days
Amount of material to be removed: Approximately 7,000 cubic yards
Number of truck loads: 100 trucks per day
Hours of operation: City Code allows 7am to 10pm on weekdays, 9am to 10pm
on holidays and weekends
A neighborhood meeting was conducted, and comments were received regarding the potential
impacts lighting and noise the completed complex may have on neighboring properties. No
comments were received about the hauling activity.
The CUP was presented to the Planning Commission where a public hearing was conducted. No
one spoke at the public hearing, and the Planning Commission recommended approval.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Aerial Photo
Draft Resolution
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes
Development Plans
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
DISCUSSION
Description of Request:
Requested is a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to export more than 400 cubic yards of material to
facilitate the construction of an outdoor recreation complex at the St. Louis Park Recreation
Center.
Location:
Zoning Analysis:
Comprehensive Plan: Park and Open Space (PRK)
Zoning: Park and Open Space (POS)
Neighborhood: Wolfe Park
Outdoor Recreation Complex:
The City of St. Louis Park is working in cooperation with the Hockey Association to construct
the proposed outdoor recreation complex. The complex features a multi-purpose field, 4,500 sf
plaza, locker rooms, a meeting room, and a parking lot (37 spaces).
The intent for the complex is to be a year-round community asset. Although the facility will be
primarily an ice rink during the winter months, it will be used during the spring, summer and fall
for other activities and events. Parks and Recreation staff met with the soccer, lacrosse, baseball,
and track youth associations and all have expressed interest in using the facility for practice
when spring weather does not allow outdoor fields to be used. This space can also be used for
other activities such as craft fairs, pet expos, dog training, concerts, farmers markets, and garage
sales.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 3
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Conditional Use Permit Review:
The CUP is required for the excavation of more than 400 cubic yards of material only. A CUP,
or other special approval, is not required for the construction of the Outdoor Recreation Complex
itself.
Excavation Details:
Duration of exporting activity: five days
Duration of site grading: 12 days
Amount of material to be removed: Approximately 7,000 cubic yards
Number of truck loads: 100 trucks per day
Hours of operation: City Code allows 7am to 10pm on weekdays, 9am to 10pm
on holidays and weekends.
Haul route: W 36th Street to Hwy 100
Summary of the Outdoor Recreation Complex:
While the CUP is primarily for the excavation of more than 400 cubic yards of material, the
following information is provided for background and additional information.
Parking:
Parking for the Recreation Center is provided on-site, with overflow parking provided at
Excelsior & Grand and at the EDA property located at the northeast corner of Monterey Drive
and Beltline Blvd. Additional parking will be constructed on the west side of the complex to
provide additional and more convenient parking for the complex itself. This lot will add 37
spaces to the overall parking for the Recreation Center.
Parking Lot Screening:
The proposed parking lot will be located approximately 39 feet from the west property line. The
36Park Apartment building is located on the adjacent property, and the units are located
approximately 40 feet from the property line. Therefore, the parking lot is located approximately
79 feet from the proposed parking lot.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 4
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Within the 79 feet, there is an 8 foot, 9 inch grade change from the parking lot to the top of the
retaining wall located at the property line, along with five trees. The applicant is proposing to
plant additional trees to assist with the screening. They will add ten 10-foot conifers and six 3-
inch caliper deciduous trees. Typically we see conifers planted at 6 – 8 feet in height, along with
deciduous trees with a 2.5 inch caliper. The applicant is proposing the larger trees to assist with
the screening.
Additionally there will be four deciduous trees planted in the parking lot islands, and 3 trees
planted between the trail and the south end of the parking lot.
Below is a building profile taken from the 36Park approved plans, and a portion of the
landscaping plan for the outdoor recreation complex. Both of them illustrate the explanation
above.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 5
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Proposed
parking lot
36Park
Apartments
30 feet 31 feet
8’ 9” 2’ 6”
8 feet
Property Line 36th Street North >>>>>
Looking North
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 6
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Setbacks:
The only setback required in the POS zoning district is 25 feet from a property zoned
Residential. The complex will be located 150 feet from the west property line where 36Park is
located.
The complex will be located 35 feet from the north property line (along 36th Street). This is
similar to the setback required for 36Park. The underground parking structure, which is the
exposed wall along 36th Street, was required to have a 30 foot setback. The building is setback
45 feet.
Access:
Vehicular access to the complex will be from the existing access on 36th Street. Pedestrians can
access the complex from the trail along the west property line, sidewalk along 36th Street, or
through the Recreation Center.
Landscaping:
As noted above, substantial consideration is given to landscaping the site between the parking lot
and the west property line. Additional landscaping is provided along the west and south edge of
the complex building.
The landscaping and tree replacement requirements have been met. 173 caliper inches of trees
are being removed from the property. Due to the larger number of trees on the property, the
applicant is not required to replace these trees. Nonetheless, the applicant is proposing to plant
27 trees. And as noted above, the trees will be larger than the minimum required by code.
Stormwater:
The proposed stormwater plan is oversized for this project, and can accommodate additional
runoff from the property. Credit for the additional storage and treatment area is in the process of
being reviewed and documented.
The stormwater plan has been permitted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA),
and it has been approved by the City Engineer. The plan is in the process of being reviewed by
the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District.
Noise:
Activities occurring at the complex are subject to the City noise limits. In summary, activities
cannot exceed 60 decibels at the property line for more than 10% of an hour. Noise can’t exceed
a reduced noise level of 50 decibels between 11pm and 7am on Sunday through Thursday, and
between midnight and 7 am on Friday and Saturday.
Additionally, paging systems or other similar systems cannot be used between 10 pm and 7am in
such a way that disturbs the peace and/or quiet of neighbors.
To prevent the sound system from violating the city noise regulations, staff is recommending that
a regulator be installed to prevent it from exceeding preset noise levels. This will prevent
accidental and recurring violations.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 7
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Neighborhood Meeting:
A neighborhood meeting was conducted on Wednesday, August 19th. Notices were mailed to all
property owners and apartment occupants. Four people attended the meeting, and no comments
were received about the hauling activities. Questions were discussed about the lighting and
noise impacts the project may have on adjacent properties, particularly the 36Park Apartments.
Planning Commission Review:
The Planning Commission conducted the public hearing and no comments from the public were
received. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the CUP. A copy of the
unofficial meeting minutes is attached.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 8
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
AERIAL PHOTO
36Park Rec
Center
SITE
36th Street
Wolfe
Park
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 9
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER
SECTION 36-79 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE
RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT EXCAVATION OF
APPROXIMATELY 7,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL FROM
PROPERTY ZONED POS PARK AND OPEN SPACE (POS) DISTRICT
LOCATED AT
3700 MONTEREY DRIVE
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. The City of St. Louis Park has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use
Permit under Section 36-79 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of excavating
approximately 7,000 cubic yards at 3700 Monterey Drive which is zoned POS Park and Open
Space, and is legally described as follows:
Addition Name: WESTMORELAND PARK
ALL OF BLKS 4-5-6-10 AND 11 ALSO THAT PART OF BLK 7 LYING SLY
OF MONTEREY DR AND LOTS 1 TO 6 INCL AND LOTS 8 TO 14 INCL
BLK 8 ALSO LOTS 1 TO 7 INCL AND LOTS 11 TO 22 BLK 9 EX STREET
INCL VAC STS AND ALLEYS
And
Addition Name: PARK COMMONS EAST
OUTLOT C
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 15-34-CUP) and the effect of the proposed excavation 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 Council has determined that the excavation will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor
hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed
excavation is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. The contents of Planning Case File No. 15-34-CUP are hereby entered into and made part
of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 10
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Conclusion
The Conditional Use Permit to permit the excavation of approximately 7,000 cubic yards of
material at the location described is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to
the following conditions:
1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the Official Exhibits.
a. Exhibit A: Site Plan
b. Exhibit B: Landscaping Plan
c. Exhibit D: Grading & Drainage Plan
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit or land disturbing activities:
a. All necessary permits must be obtained, including from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District (MCWD).
3. All trucks used for excavation and removal of materials shall utilize 36th Street, Wooddale
Ave S, and Highway 100.
4. The applicant shall comply with the following conditions during the excavation and
construction:
a. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties.
b. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary.
c. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in
order to mitigate the impact of excavation on surrounding properties.
5. A regulator shall be installed on the outdoor sound system used by the complex to prevent
the system from exceeding maximum allowed sound levels.
6. The site shall meet all fire lane requirements.
7. 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.
8. Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building
or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed.
9. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if
applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of a building permit.
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 September 8, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 11
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
EXCERPT OF UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 19, 2015 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson,
Joe Tatalovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer
STAFF PRESENT: Jason Eisold, Recreation Center Manager
Gary Morrison, Ryan Kelley, Sean Walther
3. Public Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit for Excavation for Outdoor Recreational Complex
Location: 3700 Monterey Avenue South
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 15-34-CUP
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He stated that
the CUP is primarily for the excavation of more than 400 cubic yards of material. He
reviewed plans for the recreation complex. He reviewed excavation details. He noted
that a neighborhood meeting was held on Aug. 12 and four people attended. Questions at
that meeting regarded lighting impacts to 36Park and noise impacts to surrounding
properties. Mr. Morrison spoke about a regulator which will be attached to the PA
system to prevent the system from exceeding maximum allowed sound levels. This is
included as a condition of approval.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked how the project gets approved.
Mr. Morrison said the project is in the Park and Open Space District and recreation center
is a permitted use in that district so the proposed complex is allowed by building permit
only. The City Council has reviewed the project in study sessions.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said at the Council study session she heard the complex
would mainly be used for hockey and sports. She asked how much money the City is
contributing to the project.
Mr. Morrison responded he would defer that question to Jason Eisold, Recreation Center
Manager.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison remarked she was concerned about the Rec Center
already being predominantly hockey and the City spending additional dollars for a
facility that won’t be used by most residents. She spoke about the possibility of a
provision for a preference given for different types of activities.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 12
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Commissioner Carper asked how the number of parking spaces was determined.
Mr. Morrison said staff looked at existing parking, additional parking with the new
construction, and the Rec Center’s existing overflow parking.
Commissioner Carper asked about the sound system. He said spectators will create noise
not controlled by the P.A. regulator. He asked if spectator location would be on the west
side.
Mr. Morrison responded the bleachers will be located on the east side of the rink. From
experience with other school facilities, Mr. Morrison said typically the complaints regard
the P.A. system, music and announcements which are louder than the cheering.
Commissioner Carper said he’s asking because of Benilde. He said there have been
continuous complaints about that P.A. system and spectator noise.
Commissioner Carper asked about parking lot lighting. He asked that LED lighting be
considered.
Mr. Morrison said the lights on the parking lot and the lighting attached outside are LED
fixtures.
Commissioner Carper asked if the fabric covering of the facility would allow light to
shine through it, creating a glow disruptive to the 36Park apartments. He spoke about
Benilde’s desire in the past to build a dome. He asked about translucency of the fabric
covering.
Commissioner Carper asked if the landscaping plan showed current conditions or showed
future growth. He spoke about landscaping at Trader Joe’s being inadequate to provide
screening from car lights.
Mr. Morrison said the detail presented does allow for some growth. The landscape plan
indicates what it will look like when matured. Ten foot conifers and larger trees are
being installed to help with the immediate need.
Commissioner Peilen asked how the Rec Center and new facility relate to each other.
Mr. Morrison showed the layout of the complex.
Commissioner Peilen asked if there would be open skating at the new facility.
Youth Commission Rickert asked about the purpose of a brick wall behind the fireplace.
Mr. Morrison responded that the wall is part of the exterior wall of the first level.
Chair Person asked about direct access to the pool from the parking lot. He asked about
coils under the rink. He asked about the grade and whether hockey boards would be
removed. He discussed situations where overflow parking would come into play. He
asked about issues with Benilde.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 13
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said there is a little bit different situation
regarding lighting at Benilde. Benilde has athletic field lighting. The Rec Center lighting
will be underneath and downcast and its parking lot lighting is more typical. He said
staff does attend meetings of the neighborhood and Benilde-St. Margaret’s. Most of the
issues currently are about schedules.
Jason Eisold, Recreation Center Manager, addressed questions of commissioners. He
provided a timetable of proposed year-round operation and activities. He said open
skating and figure skating would be separated from hockey through different schedules.
He said the new rink will mostly function as a practice facility. He discussed parking,
hours, the P.A. system, canopy cover, access, coils, and lighting.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked the total cost of construction, maintenance cost,
and the City share in tax dollars.
Mr. Eisold said construction cost is $5.9 million. He said the pro forma is break even
$45,000 year in operating revenue and $45,000 in operating expenses. The Hockey
Association is contributing $1.5 million over the course of the next 10 years, with a
contribution made every year.
Commissioner Carper asked what percentage of the time it will be reserved for rentals.
Mr. Eisold said they have proposed to City Council that public skating, open skating, and
public hockey would take precedence over rentals. He said staff will put together a
schedule in September for open skating. After that the Hockey Association takes their
hours, approximately 150 hours to purchase, and the rest would be available to rent or for
public opportunities.
Chair Person opened the public hearing. He closed the public hearing as there was no
one present wishing to speak.
Commissioner Robertson said the proposed route for soil transport is fine. He said the
proposal for an outdoor recreational facility is quite an amenity, unique, and provides a
great opportunity year-around to bring to St. Louis Park.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of the Conditional Use
Permit to excavate approximately 7,000 cubic yards of material from property located at
3700 Monterey Drive, subject to conditions. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion,
and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Page 14
Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey Drive
DEVELOPMENT PLANS
View Looking South
View Looking West
View from 36th Street and Raleigh Ave
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey DrivePage 15
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey DrivePage 16
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8b) Title: Conditional Use Permit for Excavation at 3700 Monterey DrivePage 17
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Comprehensive Plan
amendment from BP – Business Park to MX – Mixed Use for 4601 Highway 7, 4725 Highway
7, and 3130 Monterey Avenue, and authorize publication of resolution summary.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the proposed amendment consistent with the long range land
use plans for the area in question?
SUMMARY: City Staff proposes a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the properties located
at 4601 Highway 7, 4725 Highway 7, and 3130 Monterey Ave from BP – Business Park to MX –
Mixed Use. Staff is seeking a change to the land use designation in order to better reflect future
planning for the site, in particular to be considered for the Federal Transit Administration’s
(FTA) Joint Development program. The intent is that this amendment would not take effect until
the SWLRT Record of Decision (ROD) is made by the FTA in 2016, in order to preserve the
ability for the project to acquire a portion of this property for station area parking. A zoning
change is not proposed at this time.
City Staff has been working on background studies and information with the Southwest Project
Office (SPO) over the past several years for the site that is the subject of this proposed
Comprehensive Plan amendment. This site includes the Vision Bank site and the 4601 Highway
7 (and 3130 Monterey Ave) site to east that the City has purchased in the Beltline station area as
shown in the attached maps.
The Comprehensive Plan currently designates the area as “Business Park,” and the proposal is to
change its land use designation to “Mixed Use” to better reflect the future intent for the area.
Over the past six or so years since the property was designated Business Park, work in the station
area has evolved to a recommendation of a different mix of uses with residential in addition to
office/commercial versus industrial uses. Because Business Park does not include residential,
the intent is to make the change to allow mixed use.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment 0DS
Municipal Consent Plan – Beltline Station
Resolution
Resolution Summary for Publication
Prepared by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Community Development Deputy Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 2
Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: City Staff proposes a Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the properties
located at 4601 Highway 7, 4725 Highway 7, and 3130 Monterey Ave from BP – Business Park
to MX – Mixed Use. Staff is seeking a change to the land use designation in order to better
reflect future planning for the site. A zoning change is not proposed at this time.
Current Comprehensive Plan: BP – Business Park
Proposed Comprehensive Plan: MX – Mixed Use
Current Zoning: I-G – General Industrial
Surrounding uses: Office/warehouse to the east; Industrial to the west;
trail, rail, vacant land, and office to the south; school and
residential across Highway 7/CSAH #25 to the north
SWLRT Plans:
The base SWLRT plans currently show a surface parking lot on the Vision Bank site with
additional right-of-way owned by the city (see attached Municipal Consent plan for the Beltline
Station). Ideally, this area would not be a surface parking lot in the long term, as it is a very
visible site that could be more fully utilized to serve both park & ride and development.
As a part of the planning for SWLRT, the City has been working with the Metropolitan Council
on a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) program called “Joint Development.” Joint
Development is a program that has the intent of integrating the transit project with commercial,
residential or mixed-use (transit-oriented) development into the surrounding area to increase
density and transit ridership, create and retain jobs, and enhance the vitality and overall
economic health of the area.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 3
Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
As we continue to pursue the idea of Joint Development and incorporate transit-oriented
development (TOD) at the Beltline Station area, the FTA has indicated that the Comprehensive
Plan land use designation should reflect this planning, and in this case, “Mixed Use” is the best
category indicating that intent. The FTA needs this designation to continue to allow this area to
be considered for its Joint Development program.
The Metropolitan Council has suggested this change, with the stipulation that the “Mixed Use”
designation taking effect after the “Record of Decision” (ROD) is made by the FTA, as it may
have implications for the property acquisition that is expected to occur for the SWLRT project.
Other Planning:
Included with this overall planning, the city has applied for and received a federal grant that
would help to construct a parking ramp in this location, thereby allowing more land use
efficiencies and the opportunity for more transit-oriented development to occur. The parking
ramp would ideally serve both park & ride and surrounding development.
Staff also continues to work on the Form-Based Code (FBC) District for this area. “Mixed Use”
as a category in the Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the FBC. In a little longer range
picture we are pursuing a new Comprehensive Plan chapter for the LRT corridor, which would
set the table for development, the form-based code, and other goals and policies we have pursued
and/or adopted. This is expected to occur over approximately the next year.
Analysis:
Comprehensive Plan Goals:
The proposed amendment for these parcels is consistent with the City’s “Vision for Land Use”
and “Mixed Use” goals adopted into the Comprehensive Plan. These goals include:
15. Pursue redevelopment of future transitway station area as transit-oriented mixed-use
centers.
16. Expand the development of mixed-use areas within St. Louis Park to create a more
livable and connected community
Mixed Use:
In the Mixed Use land use category, the goal is to create pedestrian-scale mixed-use buildings,
typically with a portion of retail, service or other commercial uses on the ground floor and
residential or office uses on upper floors. Mixed use buildings typically have approximately 75
to 85 percent of the building for residential use and 15 to 25 percent for commercial or office
uses. Taller buildings may be appropriate in some areas and net residential densities between 20
and 50 units per acre are allowed, or more with a Planned Unit Development.
The proposed amendment suits the site by allowing a mix of uses, residential uses, higher
densities and efficiency of land uses that are transit-oriented. The Mixed Use category best
serves this area by promoting new development opportunities that work well with the adjacent
SWLRT station.
The complete Comprehensive Plan can be found at: http://www.stlouispark.org/comprehensive-
plan.html
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint DevelopmentPage 4
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 5
Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
Municipal Consent Plan – Beltline Station
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 6
Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
RESOLUTION NO. 15-___
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO
THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364
4601 STATE HIGHWAY 7
4725 STATE HIGHWAY 7
3130 MONTEREY AVENUE SOUTH
WHEREAS, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the City Council on
December 21, 2009 and provides the following:
1. An official statement serving as the basic guide in making land use, transportation and
community facilities and service decisions affecting the City.
2. A framework for policies and actions leading to the improvement of the physical,
financial, and social environment of the City, thereby providing a good place to live and work
and a setting conducive for new development.
3. A promotion of the public interest in establishing a more functional, healthful,
interesting, and efficient community by serving the interests of the community at large rather
than the interests of individual or special groups within the community if their interests are at
variance with the public interest.
4. An effective framework for direction and coordination of activities affecting the
development and preservation of the community.
5. Treatment of the entire community as one ecosystem and to inject long range
considerations into determinations affecting short-range action, and
WHEREAS, the use of such Comprehensive Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and
more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and
will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and
WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change,
thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities
of adjacent units of government, and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning
Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified according to
procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and
are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan, and
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 7
Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended
adoption of an amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan on August 5, 2015, based on
statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Development Framework, extensive research and analyses
involving the interests of citizens and public agencies;
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the
Planning Commission (Case No. 15-28-CP).
WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case File No. 15-28-CP are hereby entered into
and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that
the Comprehensive Plan, as previously adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council,
is hereby amended as follows:
Change the land use designation as shown on the attached map from BP Business Park to
MX Mixed Use.
FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that the Amendment will not take effect until after the
SWLRT Record of Decision (ROD) is made by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in
2016.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
(Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council.)
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8c) Page 8
Title: Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Future SWLRT Joint Development
SUMMARY
RESOLUTION NO. 15-____
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364
4601 STATE HIGHWAY 7
4725 STATE HIGHWAY 7
3130 MONTEREY AVENUE SOUTH
This resolution states that land use designation for the properties will be changed from BP
Business Park to MX Mixed Use, becoming effective after the SWLRT Record of Decision
(ROD) is made by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in 2016.
Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council
Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this resolution is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: September 17, 2015
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: First Reading of Ordinance Extending CenterPoint Energy (CPE) Franchise Ordinance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve First Reading regarding an Ordinance
amending St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2236-03 extending the term of the Centerpoint
Energy Minnegasco Franchise, and set the 2nd reading for September 21, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to extend the expiration date of CPE’s
current franchise ordinance through the end of 2016?
SUMMARY: In 2013, the City Council adopted an extension to the franchise agreement with
CenterPoint Energy. This agreement is set to expire on December 31, 2015. City staff has been
in contact with CenterPoint Energy regarding this upcoming deadline, and there is mutual
interest in an extension. Passing an extension through the City Council and Public Utilities
Commission takes approximately 5 months.
City staff has expressed a desire to negotiate a long-term agreement with CenterPoint Energy,
and has already begun discussions with them and the City Attorney. Because of these
negotiations, and the lengthy approval process, staff is proposing a 1 year extension to the
current agreement, allowing for the proper negotiations on long-term agreements. CenterPoint
has agreed to this extension and shares a mutual interest in coming to a long-term agreement.
NEXT STEPS: The second reading to extend the agreement is scheduled for September 21,
2015. Staff will continue negotiations on a long-term extension.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City’s Pavement Management
Program is currently funded by franchise fee revenues, collected by both Xcel and CenterPoint.
Based on the current fees, total franchise fees generate approximately $2.3 million annually
(CenterPoint - $889,524; Xcel - $1,420,116).
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance
Summary Ordinance
Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 2
Title: First Reading of Ordinance Extending CenterPoint Energy (CPE) Franchise Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. ____ - 15
ORDINANCE AMENDING ST. LOUIS PARK CITY
ORDINANCE NO. 2236-03 EXTENDING THE TERM OF
THE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO FRANCHISE
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Section 2. Franchise (2.1) of St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2236-03 is
amended to extend the term of the franchise granted to CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco through
December 31, 2016.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its passage and
publication.
Public Hearing/First Reading September 8, 2015
Second Reading September 21, 2015
Date of Publication October 1, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect October 6, 2015
ADOPTED this 21st day of September, 2015, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8d) Page 3
Title: First Reading of Ordinance Extending CenterPoint Energy (CPE) Franchise Ordinance
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO. ____ - 15
ORDINANCE AMENDING ST. LOUIS PARK CITY
ORDINANCE NO. 2236-03 EXTENDING THE TERM OF
THE CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO FRANCHISE
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Section 2. Franchise (2.1) of St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2236-03 is
amended to extend the term of the franchise granted to CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco through
December 31, 2016.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its passage and
publication.
ADOPTED this 21st day of September, 2015, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park.
Date Published: October 1, 2015
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: First Reading of Ordinance Extending Xcel Energy Franchise Ordinance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve First Reading regarding an Ordinance
amending St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2086-97 extending the term of the Xcel Energy
Franchise, and set the 2nd reading for September 21, 2015.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to extend the expiration date of CPE’s
current franchise ordinance through the end of 2016?
SUMMARY: In 2013, the City Council adopted an extension to the franchise agreement with
Xcel Energy. This agreement is set to expire on December 31, 2015. City staff has been in
contact with Xcel Energy regarding this upcoming deadline, and there is mutual interest in an
extension. Passing an extension through the City Council and Public Utilities Commission takes
approximately 5 months.
City staff has expressed a desire to negotiate a long-term agreement with Xcel Energy, and has
already begun discussions with them and the City Attorney. Because of these negotiations, and
the lengthy approval process, staff is proposing a 1 year extension to the current agreement,
allowing for the proper negotiations on long-term agreements. CenterPoint has agreed to this
extension and shares a mutual interest in coming to a long-term agreement.
NEXT STEPS: The second reading to extend the agreement is scheduled for September 21,
2015. Staff will continue negotiations on a long-term extension.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City’s Pavement Management
Program is currently funded by franchise fee revenues, collected by both Xcel and CenterPoint.
Based on the current fees, total franchise fees generate approximately $2.3 million annually
(CenterPoint - $889,524; Xcel - $1,420,116).
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance
Summary Ordinance
Prepared by: Steven Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8e) Page 2
Title: First Reading of Ordinance Extending Xcel Energy Franchise Ordinance
ORDINANCE NO. ____ - 15
ORDINANCE AMENDING ST. LOUIS PARK CITY
ORDINANCE NO. 2086-97 EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE NORTHERN STATES
POWER COMPANY FRANCHISE
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Section 2. Franchise (2.1) of St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2086-97 is
amended to extend the term of the franchise granted to Northern States Power Company, d/b/a
Xcel through December 31, 2016.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its passage and
publication.
Public Hearing/First Reading September 8, 2015
Second Reading September 21, 2015
Date of Publication October 1, 2015
Date Ordinance takes effect October 6, 2015
ADOPTED this 21st day of September, 2015, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 21, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8e) Page 3
Title: First Reading of Ordinance Extending Xcel Energy Franchise Ordinance
SUMMARY PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO. ____ - 15
ORDINANCE AMENDING ST. LOUIS PARK CITY
ORDINANCE NO 2086-97 EXTENDING THE TERM OF THE NORTHERN STATES
POWER COMPANY FRANCHISE
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Section 2. Franchise (2.1) of St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2086-97 is
amended to extend the term of the franchise granted to Northern States Power Company, d/b/a
Xcel through December 31, 2016.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its passage and
publication.
ADOPTED this 21st day of September, 2015, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park.
Date Published: October 1, 2015
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: September 8, 2015
Action Agenda Item: 8f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
• Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary PUD for properties at 4760 and
4900 Excelsior Blvd, subject to conditions.
• Motion granting an extension until November 18, 2015 to submit the Park Commons
West Final Plat.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the proposed revised plan for 4760 and 4900 Excelsior
Blvd (EDA and former Bally’s site) adequately address the design concerns raised at the May
18, 2015 Preliminary PUD Public Hearing; and, does the proposal meet the requirements for
Preliminary PUD approval? On 5/18/15 the City Council previously approved the Preliminary
Plat with Subdivision Variances for this project
SUMMARY: Oppidan Inc. is requesting approval of a Preliminary PUD for the properties at
4760 and 4900 Excelsior Blvd. The request was before the City Council on May 18, 2015 and
the City Council tabled action to provide time to address the concerns raised at the hearing.
Subsequently revisions to the plans were discussed at Study Sessions held on June 8, 2015 and
August 23, 2015. Road capacity and traffic issues were also discussed on August 10, 2015.
The developer has revised its proposed plans for a six-story, mixed use building in conformance
with the changes discussed at the study sessions. The Project includes 28,228 square feet of
commercial (specialty grocery store possibly including a liquor store), 176 apartment units, and
structured parking. The plan includes 18 affordable dwelling units to comply with the City’s
Inclusionary Housing policies. Approval of the Preliminary PUD tonight is a step toward
approval of the Final PUD which is an amendment to the City’s zoning ordinance and zoning
map amendment. Those actions will be before the City Council at a future City Council meeting,
however a draft zoning ordinance amendment and map amendment is attached for your
information. Approval of the Final PUD will require an affirmative vote of five of seven City
Council Members. To provide time for the developer to prepare the necessary materials for the
final PUD submittal, a motion granting the Developer additional time to submit application is
also needed at this time.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Preliminary PUD does not have
financial implications for the City; however, the developer has requested tax increment financing
for the project. The City Council/Economic Development Authority will consider the TIF
application at a later date.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion | Resolution | Draft Ordinance | Proposed Zoning
Map Amendment | Traffic Study | Shared Parking Study | Development Plans (Revised 8/27/15)
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 2
Title: 4900 Excelsior – 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 approval of a Preliminary PUD for the properties at 4760 and 4900 Excelsior
Blvd to allow construction of a six-story, mixed use building that includes 28,228 square feet of
commercial (specialty grocery store possibly including a liquor store), 176 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 Community 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 mid to late 1990s, including a vision and redevelopment concept focused on
creating a “town center” for St. Louis Park. Although a significant portion of this concept plan
has been realized over the past 15 years, there are remaining redevelopment opportunities that
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 3
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
are 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 (adopted in 1998) 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.”
The current 2030 Comprehensive Plan (adopted in 2009) did not include the same level of detail
regarding Park Commons Concept Plans. It does identify the subject parcels for mixed-use
development and includes more broadly many of the Livable Community Principles established
in previous plans.
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
development will follow the City’s Green Building Policy and 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 to create 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; it is screened from view.
The plan provides private rooftop designed outdoor recreation area 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.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 4
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (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 impacts 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.
[The remainder of the page is left blank intentionally.]
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 5
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
ZONING ANALYSIS: The following table provides the development metrics.
Zoning Table.
Factor Required Proposed Met
?
Use Mixed-use/Residential Mixed-use/Residential Yes
Lot Area 2.0 acres in an area identified in
the Comprehensive Plan for
redevelopment
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
110.7 units per acre
Yes
Height No maximum with a PUD.
(Current zoning allows 6 stories.)
77 ft. tall; and 85 feet to the
top of the tallest trellis feature
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) – 1.5 ft. to 5 ft.
Yes
Commercial
Use of Ground
Floor Area
None with a PUD 28,228, plus parking and
apartment lobby and rental
office
Yes
Ground Floor
Area Ratio
None with a PUD
0.90 Yes
Floor Area
Ratio
None with a PUD
3.3 (excludes Levels P1 & P2
which are mostly below grade)
Yes
D.O.R.A. 8,311 sq. ft. (12%)
Approx. 11,976 sq. ft. (17%) 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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 6
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Architectural Design:
Height: The proposed building is six stories tall and 77 feet tall (85 feet to the top of the tallest
trellis). 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 66 to 70 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 six stories or more.
The PUD district has the flexibility to allow taller buildings and smaller setbacks, as the City
Council deems appropriate.
Massing:
The massing of the building is broken up with wall deviations on the second though sixth floors.
The central portion of these upper floors step back six feet from the first floor elevation along
Excelsior Blvd and Park Commons Drive. On Excelsior Blvd, the sixth floor steps back 47 feet
in the central part of the building. On the Park Commons side the uppermost floor steps back 26
to 36 feet and is not visible from Park Commons at the ground level. On the Princeton Avenue
side the building steps back 35 feet and on Quentin it opens up entirely with a 155-foot setback
for the rooftop terrace.
There will 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. On Excelsior Boulevard there are two resident entrance/exit
glass doorways at the sidewalk level.
The pedestrian level 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. A glass doorway was added near the garage entrance on Quentin as well.
On the east side of the building along Princeton, there are staircases that lead up to individual
apartment units and decks. 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. A staircase to a
resident entrance/exit and staircases to the grocery store parking level have been added. There
will be decorative metal screens on the first floor parking level.
Exterior Materials: The exterior materials include brick, stone, glass, stucco, fiber cement board
siding. The building meets or exceeds the minimum requirements for Class I materials.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 7
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Shadowing: The shadow study provided by the architect demonstrates the building meets the
City’s shadowing requirements. Changes to the massing along Park Commons also have reduced
the amount of shadowing indicated in earlier plans.
Density: The current zoning of Mixed-Use and High Density Residential zoning districts allow
densities of 50 units per acre. With the PUD zoning district, the density may be increased further.
The proposed density is 110.7 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 impact on the overall level of service (LOS) of the surrounding intersections, Excelsior
Boulevard has capacity to handle the traffic generated, and the parking requirements have been
met.
Parking: The revised plan of 176 units (13 fewer units than when the Planning Commission
reviewed the plans) 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 reduces 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 spaces, 66 spaces are
under the building on the first level and 33 are on-street parking spaces adjacent to site. The P1
and P2 parking levels will have secured access and are not available to commercial customers
and residential guest parking may be limited.
The mix of commercial and residential uses provides an opportunity for shared parking, since
each of these uses have different peak hours of demand. 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. Staff finds some shared use will be critical to the success
of the project and providing adequate parking for the development. With proper management,
there is an opportunity to share spaces in the P1 Level of the building with employees of the
commercial use and accommodate guest parking for the residential use. Some overnight use of
the commercial parking area would provide ample residential guest parking.
Off-Street
Parking
Requirement
Required Parking Proposed Parking
228 bedrooms 228 spaces Underground spaces
(P1, P2 levels),
including 23 tandem
241 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
341 spaces Total provided 340 spaces
10% transit reduction (11 spaces )
Minimum required
with reduction
330 spaces Total provided 340 spaces
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 8
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
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 176
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 as part of the final PUD review. 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
Avenue. The parking lot design allows an efficient movement for vehicles through the parking
lot. Also, the access to the secured parking for residential and employee 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. Staff anticipates parking restrictions will be needed to ensure convenient
access for commercial customers and overnight residential guest parking. This can be explored
further with the final PUD and/or after the project is open and operating.
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. City Council has suggested limiting the hours of operation of the loading
docks to be conscientious to residents above and across the street. Staff intends to include
regulations in the final PUD that are consistent with other neighborhood commercial and mixed
use districts.
Traffic: A traffic study by Spack Consulting was submitted with the application. The study was
based on 183 dwelling units, so the reduction to 176 units will reduce the projected trips
generated. 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 Excelsior Blvd has capacity to handle the additional traffic, and the
impact of the proposed development will not significantly impact the LOS 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 concurred with the
findings. The City has subsequently hired SRF Consulting Group to further review the traffic
generated from this and another nearby proposed development. The combined traffic generation
did not change the conclusions of the traffic study. The intersections surrounding the
development will operate acceptably overall. The only projected change to LOS was for left
turns from westbound Excelsior Boulevard to southbound Quentin Avenue in the peak hour. In
the “no build” scenario results in LOS D and the “build” scenario is LOS E.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 9
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Setbacks: The plan provides setbacks ranging from 5.0 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 1.5 feet to 5.0 feet on the north
side. The reason for the range of setbacks is the staircases and decks that extend out from the
building. In a PUD, buildings may be built to the property line.
Some of the decks are built over, and the staircases along Princeton Avenue and Park Commons
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. The City has a template
encroachment agreement that can be entered into with the developer that will bind current and
future property owners.
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 21 of the 204 trees required on the site. It provides
237 shrubs (only 213 are 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. Concept plans have indicated large planter pots will be provided along the
south foundation.
The Excelsior Boulevard streetscape has been redesigned to incorporate additional boulevard
landscaping, instead of relying on trees in grates/vaults. The plan also incorporates planted
boulevards, foundation plantings, or a combination thereof. The plan tries to balance other site
design interests including maintenance, maintaining visibility of the storefront, and accessibility
of the on-street parking.
As part of the final PUD review the applicant 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.
There are alternative landscaping components provided, including the partial green roof, green
wall features, a public art mural, and amenities on the second floor terraces.
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.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 10
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Utilities: The revised plans incorporate all of staff’s comments. The proposed system will meet
the City Code requirements and the City’s services have capacity to handle the serve
development. The plan requires review and approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District
(MCWD).
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 the 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.
There were also several residents that attended and spoke at the public hearing on April 15, 2015,
where similar concerns were expressed.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
As previously stated in the report, the Planning Commission 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.
The revised plans responded to several of the concerns and issues raised by residents, Planning
Commissioners, and City Council through the public review process. Iterations of the plan were
presented in detail in the staff reports and presentations to the City Council at its May 18 regular
meeting, June 8 Study Session, and August 17 study session. Staff also presented an assessment
of Excelsior Boulevard traffic capacity to City Council at its August 10 study session.
Staff is recommending approval of the preliminary PUD with the conditions in the resolution.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 11
Title: 4900 Excelsior – 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; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the M-X Mixed Use and R-C High
Density Multiple Family zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, the proposed mixed-use development includes 28,228 square feet of
commercial space and 176 dwelling units is consistent with the designations, and the proposed
density 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; and
WHEREAS, the City Council tabled action on the Preliminary PUD on May 18, 2015;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council discussed iterations of the plan at its June 10, 2015, and
August 17, 2015, study sessions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, 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
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 12
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
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.
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. The Final PUD application submission shall include the following information for City
review:
A. A permanent agreement for shared parking to be reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney as to form.
B. A parking management plan for the site for City review and approval.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 13
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
C. Additional detail regarding the structural soils to be specified for the landscaped
areas, and a planting schedule that clearly lists the species, sizes and quantities of
proposed plantings shall be included in the Final PUD landscaping plans for City
review.
D. A more detailed preliminary floor plan, for the grocery store tenant, including the
liquor store component with floor area calculations provided.
E. More details regarding the proposed hours of operation for the grocery store,
liquor store, loading dock, trash and recycling pick-up, and snow
removal/hauling.
F. Locations of any trash chutes in the building and specify that recycling chute are
also provided.
G. Specifications, locations and counts for bicycle parking that are in compliance
with City Code.
H. Distances from property lines to the staircases, decks, and walls on the site.
Overhangs should be labeled and shown as dashed lines on civil and architectural
site plans.
I. Location and details of screening for any above ground utility structures.
J. Preliminary sign plan indicating the general locations, sizes and any illumination
proposed with the signs.
K. Preliminary specifications showing location, number and type of large potted
planters, benches, and outdoor seating (tables and chairs) proposed in concept
plans for Excelsior Boulevard.
L. Specifications for the streetlights along Excelsior Boulevard that are consistent
with the City’s Excelsior Boulevard special services district.
4. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities (excluding building demolition), the
following conditions shall be met:
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.
5. 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.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 14
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (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 developer shall reimburse City attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing
such documents as required in the final PUD approval.
C. Final construction plans for all public improvements shall be signed by a
registered engineer and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval.
D. Building material samples and colors must be submitted to the City for review.
6. 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 construction workers’ vehicles,
which minimizes or eliminates parking in surrounding residential neighborhoods.
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.
7. Prior to the issuance of any permanent certificate of occupancy, public improvements and
private site landscaping and irrigation shall be installed in accordance with the Official
Exhibits.
8. All private utility service connections shall be buried underground.
9. All mechanical equipment shall be fully screened.
10. 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.
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 15
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 8, 2015
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 16
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
DRAFT for future adoption
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 17
Title: 4900 Excelsior – 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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 18
Title: 4900 Excelsior – 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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 19
Title: 4900 Excelsior – 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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Page 20
Title: 4900 Excelsior – Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)
!" !#
$
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
" #
$ % &
' ()*+)
, ')-)+.(
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 21
!"
#$%
&
!'
$
()
#*+
!
'
, -./0
!'
1
! '
%0..
,$% 23 !!
$
0 !!$
!
! '
,
4
!
,
./0
!
! '
$
//
()
!
5
%
!
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 22
!"
# " $ %
$$ #
&
'
$$ (
(
$$ " )
)
*% " +
," - .
+ .
/" 0 % * 1
" $
2
3 &
/" 0 .) " $
2
3 )
/" # 0 ! "
$$ 4" ,
/" & 0
*% -5
6
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 23
!"
#$%
&
! (
%
!'
$
()
#*+
!
'
5!
%
!
'
4
1
! 6
$
!
! +
4
!
! +, $
!
! 7
%!
'
1
!
!
#
! #$(
+ #
! #$(
+ 89
! :
! #$(
+ ;
! #
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 24
.
!"
'
<=(
=,> !"
#$%&
!'
$#$(
+
%
,
%#
<
6
>!
'
'
6
!
'
!'
!5
#$(
+ ,
$! '
%
,
#
%, $
8
$!'
$
,
$
#$(
+ %4
!
,6 .
!
'
$
00
!'
$
.3
! '
$
//
!
6
%
./?!'
./0%
!
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 25
# " $ %
$$
!"#
=(
=,!@
, ,
! '
?
!
&
+
'
<&+5'>
%
./%?//
!
%#
%#$(
+ ,
!'
/!
.%//
&+5'
!'
%
,
,
!
'
,
!'
#
,
8
!'
,
,
,
,
!
,
6
!
$
@
,
,$
5
./3!*
%
$
,
!'!!$
,
21/
1/!!'!!$
,
?1//
01//!!'!!$
#$(
+
,
31//
?1//!!
#
313?
?13?!! !
'
!
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 26
3
1(
A
%(
,
!@
B"
C
$
%
%
! "
<"5 >
, <
,
> , "
6 <"5 6>
, <
>! "5 +
', (
!
@
"5
!
5
"5 6 ,
"5 +! '
"5
<
A
%(>!'
"5
%
!
' "5
,' !'
,
6 !'
,
"5
!'"5
,
,
D@ '75'&
,!
,
!
'
"5
% ,
% ! '
"5 (
,
"5 +
!
/" 0 % * 1
" $
2
3
7 * 7 *
8 (<> (<>
8#
<> <>
#$(
+8#
<> <>
#$(
+8 <> <>
'
"
!'
<
>
"
,
!
8 9 /"
! 8 /"
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 27
?
&
'
$$
%
,
! "
#
!
!
$
8
,
%
,
$
! "
$
!
!
! '
1
%
%
!
2
/
!!$
!
3
!!$
!
@
,
,
!' %
,
,
%
,
!'
8
!
'
,
!'
,
$
%'
,
,!!!!
$
!@ %
</E>
!
9
<?E>% #$ (
+ </E>%
</E>!'
6 3!
'
,
,
!
&
%
./0% $
,
,
!'
,
,
!'&+5'
./
,
4
=(
/!'
./
,%&+5'
4
, /E
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 28
0
! *
, %
,
/!?
! '
%
,<
,
>,
,
$!
'
,
./0 ;
!';
,
,
! '
;
!'
./0 $
,
!
(
$$ "
'
'"5
./0;
,' .!'
,
./0
!'
,
,
,
!'
! '
./0 $
, ,
"5
!'"5
,
,.//
D@ '75'&
,!'
"5
% ,
% !
/" 0 .) " $
2
3
7 * 1
7 * 1
:" " :" "
8 (<> (<> (<> (<>
8#
<> <> <> <>
#$(
+8#
<> <> <> <>
#$(
+8 <> <> <> <>
8
8 <> 8 <>
#$(
+8
8 <> 8 <>
#
8
8 <> 8 <>
'
"
!'
<
>
"
,
!
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 29
2
' .
,
, ;
%
,
!'
"5 ,
,
8
, 4
"5 ./0!!$
!'
,
9?
!@
%
,
!@
,
!7%
!
;
!
'
,
&+5'
!'
,
./0
;
,' !'
,
!'
'
,
4
!
/" # 0 ! "
$$ 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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 30
%
$
!
'
.//
%?/
#$(
+ %
!'
0?/
2?/
#
! '
, ,
,
!
)
*% "
!
%$
,
!'
$
00
!'
$
.3
!'
$
//
!
( )
!"
#$
$
!6
%
!6
%
.?/
?/
!'(
,
$
,4
4
$! ' 3
,
$
(
! '
$
$
!
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 31
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 32
/
, " -
'$
, - ./0
! '
1
! '
%0..
,$% 23 !!$
!!$
!
! '
,
4
!
,
./0
!
! '
// $
()
!
5
%
!
+
'%
*&+
, -
" "
"
' ,!
&
#&
&./0;
#&./0;
&./0
#&./0
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 33
1Traffic Impact Study A Excelsior Blvd Mixed-Use
Appendix A - Figures
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 34
2Traffic Impact Study A Excelsior Blvd Mixed-UseAppendix A - FiguresCity Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 35
3Traffic Impact Study A Excelsior Blvd Mixed-Use
Appendix A - Figures
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 36
! " ! #"
! " ! #" 4Traffic Impact Study A Excelsior Blvd Mixed-UseAppendix A - FiguresCity Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 37
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 38
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 39
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 40
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
No tes:
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 41
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 42
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 43
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 44
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 45
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 46
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 47
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 48
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 September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 49
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 50
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 51
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 52
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 53
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 54
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 55
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 56
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f)
Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 57
No.REVISIONSDATEDATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense NumberC08-25-2015Date1990.014900 ExcelsiorBHL100BHLANDSCAPEPLANL1001SITE LANDSCAPE PLAN1/16" = 1'-0"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.L1002PLANTING DETAILS1/16" = 1'-0"City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 58
City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 59
REVISIONSDATENo.DATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense Number 2014 BKV Group, Inc. EOECI hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional underthe laws of the State of Minnesota.08-25-2015Date1990.01BHBHA0024900 ExcelsiorFLOOR PLANSCity Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 60
REVISIONSDATENo.DATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense Number 2014 BKV Group, Inc. EOECI hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional underthe laws of the State of Minnesota.08-25-2015Date1990.01BHBHA0034900 ExcelsiorFLOOR PLANSCity Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 61
REVISIONSDATENo.DATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense Number 2014 BKV Group, Inc. EOECI hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional underthe laws of the State of Minnesota.08-25-2015Date1990.01BHBHA0044900 ExcelsiorFLOOR PLANSCity Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 62
REVISIONSDATENo.DATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense Number 2014 BKV Group, Inc. EOECI hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional underthe laws of the State of Minnesota.08-25-2015Date1990.01BHBHA0054900 ExcelsiorFLOOR PLANSCity Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 63
REVISIONSDATENo.DATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense Number 2014 BKV Group, Inc. EOECI hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional underthe laws of the State of Minnesota.08-25-2015Date1990.01BHBHA0064900 ExcelsiorRENDERINGCity Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 64
REVISIONSDATENo.DATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense Number 2014 BKV Group, Inc. EOECI hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional underthe laws of the State of Minnesota.08-25-2015Date1990.01BHBHA0074900 ExcelsiorELEVATIONSSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 65
REVISIONSDATENo.DATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense Number 2014 BKV Group, Inc. EOECI hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional underthe laws of the State of Minnesota.08-25-2015Date1990.01BHBHA0084900 ExcelsiorELEVATIONSSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 66
REVISIONSDATENo.DATEDRAWN BYCHECKED BYCOMMISSION NO.CERTIFICATIONLicense Number 2014 BKV Group, Inc. EOECI hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional underthe laws of the State of Minnesota.08-25-2015Date1990.01BHBHA0094900 ExcelsiorELEVATIONSSCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"City Council Meeting of September 8, 2015 (Item No. 8f) Title: 4900 Excelsior –Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 67