Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2013/07/15 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular
AGENDA JULY 15, 2013 7:00 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers Discussion Items 1. 6:30 p.m. City Council Policy Discussion – Committee Appointment Process and Legislative Contacts 2. 7:00 p.m. Deer Management Update Written Reports 3. Southwest LRT Update 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers 1. Call to Order 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 2a. Junior Leader Recognition 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Special Study Session Meeting Minutes June 17, 2013 3b. Study Session Meeting Minutes June 24, 2013 3c. City Council Meeting Minutes July 1, 2013 3d. Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes July 1, 2013 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. First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses Recommended Action: Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance amending Chapter 36 of the City Code pertaining to parking uses, and to set the second reading for August 5, 2013. 8b. Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary/Final Plat of Auto Motion Carwash Addition, with conditions recommended by staff. 9. Communication Meeting of July 15, 2013 City Council Agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 4a. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Church of the Holy Family at 5900 & 5925 West Lake Street for August 10, 2013. 4b. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Frank Lundberg American Legion Post 282, 5605 36th St. W. in St. Louis Park, for their Annual Anniversary Celebration to be held July 27 and 28, 2013, in the parking lot at the American Legion. 4c. Adopt Resolution designating Wayzata Boulevard between Ford Road and the west city limit as a Municipal State Aid Street. 4d. Adopt Resolution authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Hennepin County for participation in a bikeway feasibility study for Cedar Lake Road between Highway 169 and Nevada Avenue, and on Virginia Avenue from Cedar Lake Road to the North Cedar Lake Regional Trail. 4e. Adopt Resolution approving a Minor Amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Costco Fueling Facility, with conditions recommended by staff. 4f. Adopt Resolution approving the use of the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund (ERF) for the 3601/3 Rhode Island Avenue Rehabilitation Project. 4g. Approve for filing Fire Civil Service Commission Minutes April 30, 2013. 4h. Approve for filing Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes May 23, 2013. 4i. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 5, 2013. 4j. Approve for filing Vendor Claims. 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. Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Meeting: Special Study Session Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Discussion Item: 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: City Council Policy Discussion – Committee Appointment Process and Legislative Contacts RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action requested. This is a policy discussion of the City Council. POLICY CONSIDERATION: What process should be used for appointing Council members to various outside boards or committees, or for the Mayor and/or Council to have discussions with outside elected officials? SUMMARY: At the July 8 Study Session the City Council requested this be placed on the July 15 Special Study Session for discussion. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Choose an item. Meeting of Click here to enter a date. (Item No. 1) Page 2 Title: City Council Policy Discussion – Committee Appointment Process and Legislative Contacts Meeting: 6SHFLDOStudy Session Meeting Date: JuO\ , 2013 Discussion Item EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Deer Management Update RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. Staff desires direction from Council on the policy question noted below. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the City Council interested in amending the current Deer Management Program/Policy? SUMMARY: Based on events that occurred earlier this year, the City Council requested that this item be included on a study session agenda for further discussion. At the October 3, 2011 Council meeting, the City Council passed a revised Deer Management Policy that included language to allow the removal of deer on public property in areas other than the Nature Center and on private property with the consent of property owners. The City did attempt to remove deer from public property in 2013 but has not given authorization to remove on private property. The City did not remove any deer in 2011 and 2012. We did request permits from the DNR for those years; however, due to the lack of snow, conditions were not favorable for removal. Our current program and rational behind it is included in this report. To assist Council with its consideration of the policy question noted above, staff has outlined the following options. 1. Continue to utilize the policy as adopted on October 3, 2011; 2. Amend the policy to require that nearby property owners be notified when deer removal efforts will be undertaken on public or private property. 3. Amend the policy to revert to the original program adopted in 1994 which allows only for deer removal at the Westwood Hills Nature Center. 4. Defer a specific decision and direct staff to bring back additional information to allow the Council to be better informed on its policy options. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. 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 Provisions for Deer Management Program Deer Management Units and Preferred Habitat Map 2013 Aerial Deer Survey 2011 Deer Density from Deer Population Model Prepared by: Jim Vaughan, Environmental Coordinator Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. ) Page 2 Title: Deer Management Update DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: When originally adopted in 1994, the primary objectives of the City’s Deer Management Program were: • To provide for the health, safety and welfare of area residents and park users; • To protect and preserve the Westwood Hills Environmental Education Center in accordance with its original intent and mission; • To assist area residents in the protection and preservation of their property; and • To control and manage the community’s highly valued deer population in the safest and most humane way. At the October 3, 2012 City Council meeting, the City Council revised the “Adopted Provisions for an on-going Deer Management Program”. Under the current program, the City can obtain permits from the DNR and removel deer from public property without notification. PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The City of St. Louis Park is divided into Deer Management Units (DMU). Permits to remove deer are applied for from the DNR based on appropriate numbers of deer for each DMU. The DMU numbers are based on carrying capacities (biological and cultural). An explanation of each is provided below. CARRYING CAPACITY: “Carrying Capacity (CC) refers to the maximum sustainable size of a population. CC of a population is limited by any number of constraints, both biological (BCC) and Cultural Carrying Capacity (CCC). The effective and appropriate management of deer populations must consider both biological and cultural carrying capacities.” BIOLOGICAL CARRYING CAPACITY (BCC): “The Biological Carrying Capacity (BCC) is based on the point where the habitat can support a species sustainably. BCC is determined by the capability of the area to provide the habitat components of a wildlife species – food, water, cover and space. As deer populations grow, individual animals compete for the resources their habitat provides, with less of the four requisites (food, water, cover and space) available per deer.” The recommended number of deer to manage per acre of habitat varies, but the Minnesota DNR and the University of Minnesota both recommend 8-10 deer per square mile of habitat. Even when food is sparse or competition for food is high, deer continue to multiply. Areas stripped of vegetation still can have too many deer; they just don’t grow as large. When that happens, the deer have outnumbered their BCC of their environment. The first step in determining population objectives within an urban area is to determine what areas of the city are supporting deer populations and review those areas in terms of their biological carrying capacities. For our management purposes, those areas that can provide adequate food, water, shelter and space to sustain a healthy population are then identified as “preferred habitat”. Although residential lots, open space and maintained parklands may provide some food base, these areas do not supply all components of the habitat requirement and should not be considered preferred habitat. Based on a number of factors, large areas are divided into smaller areas which are sometimes known as “deer management units” (DMU’s). The key factors in establishing DMU boundaries are natural or artificial barriers/deterrents to deer movements, preferred habitat locations, and density of deer observations. Concentrations of deer and other specific conditions may vary widely between and within DMU’s and focused research and discussion based on those specific conditions must be done. (See map for defined Deer Management Unit Areas and Preferred Habitats) Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. ) Page 3 Title: Deer Management Update The State of Minnesota DMU’s are shown for 2011, with a large portion of the State retaining a preferred range of 8-18 deer per square mile. (See 2011 Pre Fawn Deer Density from Population Model map) City Calculation for Deer Density based upon 2013 Flyover Data (See attached map for defined Deer Management Unit Areas and Preferred Habitat.) Cultural Carrying Capacity (CCC) Cultural Carrying Capacity of a species refers to the degree humans tolerate or accept deer in the area they live. Some in our community strongly disagree with the BCC approach that the City of St. Louis Park and other cities use. The argument made is that we should take into account the views of stakeholders in order to create a strategy that is most acceptable. There are three aspects to the CCC 1) deer abundance, 2) deer /human interactions 3) human attitudes and tolerances regarding deer. The CCC can take into consideration the number of complaints and compliments that are received about deer. When creating management strategies, it would be ideal if both the BCC and CCC methods could be combined to come up with an appropriate herd size. The data provided on deer abundance, preferred habitat, crash data and residential attitude toward deer would be used to determine what the Cultural Carrying Capacity is of the urban area and for each management unit. The difficultly in using the CCC as a rational to determine the number to remove is in getting residents to agree on a number of deer that is acceptable in an area. People can tolerate different numbers based on their personal beliefs or the level of damage to their landscape. Determining Deer Density Objectives Using the identified preferred habitat areas, the aerial counts completed, and the ranked ecological and cultural components of each habitat (DMU), the deer density for each DMU can be assessed. The deer density is calculated factoring in the number and location of car/deer crashes occurring within the City, the number of non-harvest deer deaths occurring within the year, as well as the number and location of deer nuisance complaints/compliments received by the City. Data provided on deer abundance, preferred habitat, crash data, and complaints/ compliments could be used to determine the Cultural Carrying Capacity (CCC) for each DMU. Appropriate management goals could then set for each DMU. NEXT STEPS: If City Council would like to further discuss the Deer Management Program, staff can provide additional information as needed. Minimum Deer Removal Required Per Unit 2013 Deer Manage ment Unit Fly over count DNR - 2013 (*Projected Deer count from 2011 Flyover) Preferred Habitat in Sq. miles (D) Deer Density goal (E) Maximum # of deer per goal & Habitat (F) Total deer to remove (actual count) Total deer to remove (projected count) 1 13 22 0.70 5 3 10 19 2 0 0 0.13 25 3 0 0 3 0 0 0.12 30 4 0 0 4 25 15 0.22 25 5 20 10 5 0 0 0.17 25 4 0 0 6 0 0 0.20 15 3 0 0 *Based upon DNR calculations for urban deer (20% increase) (DXE=F) Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. ) Page 4 Title: Deer Management Update ADOPTED PROVISIONS FOR AN ON-GOING DEER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (As revised by City Council on October 3, 2011) I. Population Maintenance of Deer: The herd size is to be maintained at the DNR recommended standard. A. The City will contract with Three Rivers Park District and/or the DNR on an annual basis to conduct a mid-winter aerial survey of the deer population throughout St. Louis Park. B. The City will continue to enforce the current deer feeding ban on all properties. C. The City will use data produced from the annual mid-winter aerial survey to determine the size of the deer population in other areas. A permit from the DNR will be obtained by showing the City’s Biological Carrying Capacity (“BCC”) relative to how many deer are seen in the flyover. The BCC is the number of deer that an area can sustain without damaging habitat. The permit from the DNR is then issued for the difference between the number of deer that are seen in the flyover versus the BCC. D. On all public properties, the City is to implement population reduction and maintenance methods which have been approved by the DNR and are deemed to be both safe and efficient in order to achieve desired population levels consistent with current Deer Management Units. E. On private properties throughout the community, the City will, with full knowledge, consent and signature of the owner, make arrangements to implement the population reduction of deer. Property owners will be asked to sign a contract with the City ensuring their willingness to participate. The City will notify the property owners directly adjacent to the property where the removal will occur. Deer will be removed using St. Louis Park police officers or a contracted private company. All deer removed will be processed and transported to a designated food shelf or other charitable organizations to be distributed to those in need of venison. II. Other On-going Programs: Concerns about funding, public education and program continuity must also be addressed. A. A comprehensive educational program has been developed by Parks and Recreation in conjunction with Community Education to keep the public informed on wildlife issues, with specific emphasis in the area of protecting private property from wildlife predation. Parks and Recreation staff will annually promote, through several city publications, the city’s ordinance prohibiting the feeding of deer. Staff will continue to enforce this ordinance. B. The City staff will continue to work with the DNR and neighboring municipalities in an attempt to develop a unified strategy for dealing with this regional issue, and to ensure that the wildlife management efforts of St. Louis Park are not in conflict with the policies and programs of surrounding communities. Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Deer Management Update Page 5 0 0 80 25 11 13 3 4 3 1 1 13 21 2 4 7 2 3 3 4 310 GV East GV West SLP West SLP East GV Theodore Wirth Park Plymouth SE SLP Central SLP South Plymouth SE §¨¦394 §¨¦394 £¤169 £¤169 ?A@100 ?A@55 ?A@7 ?A@100 ?A@100 GWX3 GWX40 GWX17 GWX102 GWX25 GWX81 GWX156 GWX70 GWX66 GWX5 GWX153 GWX25MINNETONKABLVD GLENWOOD AVEDOUGLAS DR NWINNETKA AVE NMEDICINE LAKE RD LAK E S T W GOLDE N V A LLEYRDDULUTHST COUNTY R O A D 2 5 City of Golden Valley, Saint Louis Park, MinneapolisAerial Deer Survey Completed on 1/8/2013Total Count 57 N 1 Miles This map is a compilation of data from varioussources and is provided "as is" without warrantyof any representation of accuracy, timeliness, orcompleteness. The user acknowledges and acceptsthe limitations of the Data, including the fact that theData is dynamic and in a constant state ofmaintenance, correction, and update. 12th Avenue NorthNorthwest BlvdMap Created: 01/11/13 Department of: NRMCreated by: sth Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Deer Management Update Page 6 Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Deer Management UpdatePage 7 Meeting: Special Study Session Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Written Report: 3 TITLE: Southwest LRT Update RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action necessary at this time. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. The purpose of the report is to provide an update to the Council on station items that are currently being discussed related to SW LRT. SUMMARY: Preliminary engineering and planning work on SW LRT continues, including close scrutiny of elements in the station areas. The Southwest Project Office (SPO) has been working with City Staff on platform locations, parking plans, grade separation concepts and trail locations for the station areas under the freight co-location and relocation alternatives. This report is to provide an update on the options being considered. More details will follow in upcoming meetings. A discussion of the alternatives is in the discussion section of this report, and maps from the SPO are attached. NEXT STEPS: Over the coming weeks and months additional evaluation of the alternatives will occur. A set or sets of alternatives will be included in the “base” for cost estimating purposes, while additional iterations/options will continue to be pursued. As these options evolve, staff will bring them back to the Council for additional discussion. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable at this time. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Station Area Drawings Wooddale Station Area Concept Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Title: Southwest LRT Update DISCUSSION Louisiana Station Area – Two concepts for station location are being considered and will be used for the preparation of cost estimates. One is on the north side of Oxford, east of Louisiana Ave, and the other utilizes the south rail wye to put the station closer to Methodist Hospital. Various options for park and ride lots in the area are under consideration. (Please see attached maps.) Wooddale Station Area – Staff has proposed moving the station location east from Wooddale to the area between Yosemite and Xenwood Avenues to better facilitate circulation for pedestrians and autos in the area. This concept would also allow LRT to be grade-separated in an underpass at Wooddale Avenue and locates the station platform essentially level with 35th Street, easing pedestrian access to the platform. The regional trail would also be grade-separated in an underpass under Wooddale Avenue (The cost for regional trail grade separations are noted to be paid for “by others.”) Xenwood Connection - A connection of Xenwood Avenue between 36th Street under the freight railtracks connecting north to the frontage road is also under consideration for either a roadway or a trail. A trail connection would be much easier to accomplish; the city is evaluating the traffic impacts to provide information as to the benefits of a roadway connection in this area. Beltline Station Area (assumes Beltline Blvd is at grade) – The station is located on the east side of Beltline, with several site options under consideration for park and ride. In either a co- location or relocation scenario, grade separation of the trail would be a bridge over Beltline Boulevard. Various options for park and ride lots in the area are under consideration. Grade Separation of Beltline - Grade separation of Beltline Boulevard is under consideration as well. In a co-location scenario, the freight rail, light rail and trail would remain at the grade it is today, with Beltline Blvd. being lowered under the rail/trail corridor. This would require flood proofing of the roadway as it would be below the water table. In a relocation scenario, the Beltline Blvd. separation could occur by raising the light rail and trail some, and lowering the roadway; this would have less impact on the water table. site data site area (north of platform): 2.6 acres surface parking: 216 spaces (existing) 131 spaces (remaining) 86 spaces (removed) site area (option 1): 2.1 acres surface parking: 154 spaces site area (option 2): 5.8 acres (total property) surface parking: 282 spaces site area (option 3): 2.9 acres (3 parcels) surface parking: 227 spaces *parking required to be determined by number of park-and-ride locations and potential development 2potential surfaceparking oxford st.louisiana ave. s.edgewood ave. s.dakota ave. s.louisi a n a c ir .station platform trailfreight kiss-and-ride/shuttle 1 potential surfaceparking 3potential surfaceparking Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT Update Page 3 SITE DATASITE AREA (NORTH OF PLATFORM): 2.6 ACRESSURFACE PARKING: 216 SPACES (EXISTING) 131 SPACES (REMAINING) 86 SPACES (REMOVED) SITE AREA (OPTION 1): 2.1 ACRESSURFACE PARKING: 154 SPACESSITE AREA (OPTION 2): 5.8 ACRES (TOTAL PROPERTY)SURFACE PARKING: 282 SPACESSITE AREA (OPTION 3): 2.9 ACRES (3 PARCELS)SURFACE PARKING: 227 SPACES*PARKING REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY NUMBER OF PARK-AND-RIDE LOCATIONS AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT2POTENTIAL SURFACEPARKINGOXFORD ST.LOUISIANA AVE. S.DAKOTA AVE. S.LOUISIANA CIR.STATION PLATFORMTRAILFREIGHTKISS-AND-RIDE/SHUTTLE1POTENTIAL SURFACEPARKING3POTENTIAL SURFACEPARKINGEDGEWOOD AVE. S.Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT UpdatePage 4 site data site area (north of platform): 2.6 acres surface parking: 216 spaces (existing) 131 spaces (remaining) 86 spaces (removed) site area (east of lrt track): 4.4 acres (using parts of 3 parcels) surface parking: 220 spaces *parking required to be determined by number of park-and-ride locations and potential development oxford st.louisiana ave. s.edgewood ave. s.dakota ave. s.louisi a n a c ir .trailfreight station platform kiss-and-ride/shuttle potential surfaceparking Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT Update Page 5 SITE DATASITE AREA (NORTH OF PLATFORM): 2.6 ACRESSURFACE PARKING: 216 SPACES (EXISTING) 131 SPACES (REMAINING) 86 SPACES (REMOVED)SITE AREA (EAST OF LRT TRACK): 4.4 ACRES (USING PARTS OF 3 PARCELS) SURFACE PARKING: 220 SPACES*PARKING REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY NUMBER OF PARK-AND-RIDE LOCATIONS AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTOXFORD ST.LOUISIANA AVE. S.EDGEWOOD AVE. S.DAKOTA AVE. S.LOUISIANA CIR.TRAILFREIGHTSTATION PLATFORMKISS-AND-RIDE/SHUTTLEPOTENTIAL SURFACEPARKINGSpecial Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT UpdatePage 6 SITE DATASITE AREA (OPTION 1): 4.8 ACRESSURFACE PARKING: 477SPACESSURFACE PARKING (OPTION 2): 220 SPACES*PARKING REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY NUMBER OF PARK-AND-RIDE LOCATIONS AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT1POTENTIAL SURFACEPARKINGOXFORD ST.LOUISIANA AVE. S.EDGEWOOD AVE. S.DAKOTA AVE. S.LOUISIANA CIR.FREIGHTTRAIL2POTENTIAL SURFACEPARKINGSTATION PLATFORMSpecial Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT UpdatePage 7 SITE DATASITE AREA (OPTION 1): 4.8 ACRESSURFACE PARKING (WITH BRIDGE PIERS): 455 SPACESSURFACE PARKING (OPTION 2): 220 SPACES*PARKING REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY NUMBER OF PARK-AND-RIDE LOCATIONS AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENTOXFORD ST.LOUISIANA AVE. S.EDGEWOOD AVE. S.DAKOTA AVE. S.LOUISIANA CIR.FREIGHTTRAILSTATION PLATFORM1POTENTIAL SURFACEPARKING2POTENTIAL SURFACEPARKINGSpecial Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT UpdatePage 8 STATION PLATFORMFREIGHTPOTENTIAL TRAIL UNDERPASSBICYCLE FACILITIES (TYP.)RETAINING WALL AND FALL PROTECTIONSTATION ACCESS TRAIL12’ SIDEWALKBARRIER / FENCING (TYP.)KISS AND RIDE (3)8’ SIDEWALK 16’ SIDEWALK12’ TRAILKISS AND RIDE (3)W OODDALE A VE . T.H. 7YOSEMITE AVE. S.W. 36TH STREETMINNESOTA 7 SERVICE ALABAMA AVE. RAILROAD AVE.W. 37TH STREETW. 35-1/2 STREETBUS STOPBUS STOPBUS STOPRETAINING WALL AND FALL PROTECTION Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT UpdatePage 9 STATION PLATFORM POTENTIAL TRAIL UNDERPASS BICYCLE FACILITIES (TYP.) RETAINING WALL AND FALL PROTECTION STATION A CCESS TRAIL 12’ SIDEWALK BARRIER / FENCING (TYP.)KISS AND RIDE (3)8’ SIDEWALK 16’ SIDEWALK 12’ TRAIL KISS AND RIDE (3)WOODDALE AVE. T.H. 7 YOSEMITE AVE. S.W. 3 6 TH STRE E T MINNESOTA 7 SERVICE ALABAMA AVE. RAILROAD A VE. W. 3 7 TH STRE E T W. 3 5 - 1 / 2 STRE E T BUS STOP BUS STOP BUS STOP RETAINING WALL AND FALL PROTECTION Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT Update Page 10 S I T E DATA *PARKING REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY NUMBER OF PARK-AND-RIDE LOCATIONS AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT Update Page 11 S I T E DATA *PARKING REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY NUMBER OFPARK-AND-RIDE LOCATIONS AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT Update Page 12 S I T E DATA *PARKING REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY NUMBER OFPARK-AND-RIDE LOCATIONS AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT Update Page 13 S I T E DATA *PARKING REQUIRED TO BE DETERMINED BY NUMBER OFPARK-AND-RIDE LOCATIONS AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT Update Page 14 Station platformmoved to the east LRT underpass Trail underpass Street or trailconnection 36th Street XenwoodAveYosemiteAveWo o d d ale A v e 35th Street Wooddale Station Area Station plaza Legend Trail Freight LRT Prepared by St. Louis Park Community Development E Special Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3) Title: Southwest LRT Update Page 15 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Presentation: 2a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Junior Leader Recognition RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor Jacobs is asked to recognize the Junior Leaders for their service this summer. Recreation Coordinator, Lisa Abernathy, and Summer Playground Coordinator, Katie Lee, will be in attendance. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: There were 30 youth volunteers that completed the program this summer and collectively they have volunteered over 1,200 hours. Several of these volunteers have been involved for many years. The Junior Leaders Program has been in place for over 20 years. Junior Leaders for the St. Louis Park Operations and Recreation Department volunteer during June and July in the Summer Playground Program. This program offers 7th through 9th grade youth an opportunity to maintain their relationship with the summer playground program, while gaining valuable on-the-job experience assisting full-time leaders. Job responsibilities included assisting leaders with program activities as well as initiating activities for playground participants. Junior Leaders assisted program participants in understanding games and craft projects, keeping them interested and involved in activities as well as aware of upcoming events. Junior Leaders also assisted in limited supervision of program participants to ensure their safety at the park. During their time in the parks this summer, they became role models for the program participants they worked with, as well as excellent helpers for the full-time leaders. This summer there were 11 playground sites with a total of 799 kids registered. Along with playground staff, Junior Leaders play a key role in providing a positive experience for each participant. Junior Leaders were required to work a minimum of 40 hours during the Summer Playground Program. Junior Leaders are rewarded with this special recognition evening, a letter of recommendation, and passes to The Rec Center’s ice arena. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, Administrative Secretary Lisa Abernathy, Recreation Supervisor Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Minutes: 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA JUNE 17, 2013 The meeting convened at 6:00 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Susan Sanger, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia Ross, and Sue Santa. Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs and Councilmember Jake Spano. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human Resources (Ms. Deno), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Controller (Mr. Swanson), Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes). Guest: David Mol, CPA (HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd.) 1. Southwest LRT Update Mr. Locke presented the staff report and distributed several maps that display the existing freight rail car volumes, future freight rail car volumes for the Brunswick West and Brunswick Central alignments, freight rail track height over and above existing heights for the Brunswick West and Brunswick Central alignments, and freight rail track construction for the Brunswick West and Brunswick Central alignments. He stated the maps illustrate impacts in terms of freight rail volumes noting there would be a significant increase in volumes on the proposed reroutes. He advised the maps depict more use of right-of-way for the Brunswick West and Brunswick Central alignments and the maps illustrating rail track height show dramatically increased elevations in some places. He explained that the large map depicts the colocation route beginning near the Penn Station in Minneapolis extending through St. Louis Park to the Louisiana Avenue station area and under a colocation scenario, the entire MN&S route in the City primarily stays the way it exists today with no change to how the trains operate, i.e., at grade crossings (including at grade crossings at Wooddale and Beltline), proximity of the line to the high school, and the way trains go through neighborhoods, with changes occurring to the east of this area. He stated the map shows the regional trail going below Wooddale with a grade separated trail but no grade separation for light rail or freight rail thus creating traffic impacts especially during peak hours. He indicated that staff has been exploring what improvements could occur at Wooddale to help alleviate or overcome these traffic impacts, including a grade separated crossing for freight rail and light rail, noting a grade separated crossing for freight rail presents grade challenges for trains traveling into Minneapolis. He stated that impacts related to having freight rail continue at grade at Wooddale include how to deal with the traffic, including emergency vehicle access, and having freight rail in the station areas potentially affecting pedestrians and bikes. He advised that all the light rail stations are on the south sides of the corridor under all the alternatives including the Louisiana Avenue station area being moved to the south to follow the old wye. He stated the Highway 100 project is ahead of the light rail project and will require replacing the bridge for freight rail no matter where freight rail is routed and the expectation is that there will be a bridge capable of handling freight rail built into the Highway 100 crossing. He explained that the Beltline crossing will experience the same kinds of City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Title: Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013 traffic impact issues as Wooddale and the SPO is showing the trail going over Beltline regardless of whether there are freight trains at this location. He stated the map depicts freight rail present in this area and shows the trail going over both freight rail and light rail and shifts the trail from the north side to the south so it aligns with the Midtown Greenway. He advised that traffic impacts in this location are significant and the SPO is not proposing any change in the at grade crossing and proposes some signalizing to protect the freight rail corridor traffic from backing up. He stated the City feels it would be wise to take Beltline underneath freight rail to grade separate the road from light rail, freight rail, and the trail to improve circulation in this area given Beltline’s importance as a key transportation link. He added this might also create some opportunities for the way in which sites immediately surrounding the area are developed. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger felt the City should request a tunnel or underpass for Beltline regardless of whether a colocation or reroute is selected because the addition of light rail will make the traffic congestion in this area significantly worse. Councilmember Mavity noted that when light rail crosses at grade the light rail trains do not ever stop in the intersection so the crossing is quicker than when stopped at a red light. Mr. Locke indicated the City has asked the SPO to address freight rail delays when trains are not operating on schedule and the City needs to understand what happens in those scenarios. Councilmember Mavity requested clarification that the south connection is going in under every scenario and at this point no trains will travel north coming from the west. She stated that in any scenario it would be important to keep trains moving because moving trains have lighter impact than stopped trains. She was concerned about the potential for a northern connection under a colocation scenario since the wye is being removed and trains coming from the south stopping and making noise, adding if the trains have to stop in order to go north, there needs to be a northern connection for the lighter freight rail traffic. Mr. Locke noted that if train traffic on the Bass Lake Spur is trying to get to the north and the wye is removed, the trains would connect to the MN&S tracks by first going to the south and then to the north on the existing MN&S tracks. Councilmember Mavity stated this could potentially block Alabama Avenue. She urged the City to plan ahead to make sure that does not happen adding she did not want to see this become a de facto switching yard. Mr. Locke discussed impacts on redevelopment opportunities stating the City has a policy to pursue strategic acquisitions from willing sellers in key locations and the City is pursuing an opportunity in the Beltline area that will be presented to Council in the near future. He stated that light rail, freight rail and the trail all continue through the eastern portion of the City into the Kenilworth corridor and the SPO has explored six colocation alternatives through Kenilworth. He explained there are a couple of pinch points along this corridor with a key pinch point north of the Lake Street bridge with only 49’ of right-of-way by the Cedar Lake townhomes. He stated if the trail, light rail, and freight rail are co-located in this corridor, the right-of-way needs to be 94’ and would require acquisition of 33 units of townhomes in order to obtain sufficient right-of- way. He indicated there are also twenty condo units on the west side of the corridor south of Lake Street that need to be acquired under all the alternatives; and, one parcel, an apartment building in the southwest quadrant of Cedar Lake Parkway, that is needed only for the alternative that accommodates freight rail, LRT and the trail at grade. Mr. Locke stated that the existing City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 3 Title: Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013 right-of-way of 139’ in the vicinity of the 20 townhomes south of Lake Street on the west side of the corridor is sufficient for SWLRT light rail trains, but if this area has to accommodate a platform and tracks on either side of the platform for the proposed Midtown Greenway trains, the right-of-way needs to be approximately 150’ and would impinge on the existing townhomes. He added that another key acquisition is the narrow area shown on the plans as cross section C. For there to be sufficient ROW in this location, property owned by BNSF is needed. Councilmember Mavity requested that the SPO provide a cost comparison for changing the Lake Street Bridge or taking the 20 townhomes. Mr. Locke pointed out the Midtown Greenway train configuration shown on the map is only one of the options being looked at and stated the City has asked whether the platform can be moved to avoid needing to acquire the 20 townhomes. Councilmember Hallfin asked about the timeframe on the Midtown Greenway. Mr. Mark Fuhrmann from the SPO approached the City Council and stated that Met Council received a $1 million Federal grant to conduct an alternatives analysis and this analysis is well underway. Mr. Locke discussed the tunnel versions, elevating the trail or elevating light rail as well as relocating part of the trail and stated a deep bore tunnel would be thirty to forty feet below the trail and freight rail and would start around the Lake Street bridge and come out just before the Burnham bridge for a distance of approximately 4,100’. He added a shallow tunnel would begin north of the Lake Street Bridge for a distance of approximately 2,800’. Councilmember Ross asked if the properties in this area would still need to be acquired if a tunnel were constructed. Mr. Locke replied in the affirmative. He indicated the City has asked the SPO to consider a version of the shallow tunnel option that did not have freight rail on top of the tunnel because of the significant engineering issues with having freight rail traveling over a tunnel. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger asked if the current Burnham Bridge would remain as is under any of the elevated options. Mr. Locke indicated he was not sure how elevated trains would handle the bridge, stating that at some point the trains have to come down to the surface to join the BNSF tracks beyond the Penn Avenue station. He noted that if freight rail were co-located, the Cedar Lake trail across the north end of Cedar Lake would have a bridge over both freight rail and light rail to connect back to the existing trail in the vicinity of the Penn Avenue station. Councilmember Santa requested confirmation that no businesses would need to be acquired under this scenario. Mr. Locke replied that this was correct. Councilmember Mavity stated it was becoming clear in looking at the Louisiana station in the Elmwood neighborhood and all points south that this becomes a circulation issue from that side City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 4 Title: Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013 of Wooddale and questioned whether there was an opportunity to explore grade separation between the frontage road and Alabama Avenue. Mr. Harmening advised the City has been considering whether to submit a proposal for project costs or mitigation or betterment not covered by the SWLRT project in the Governor’s bonding bill package for 2014 and stated the deadline for submitting material is Friday, June 21. He pointed out that the City’s legislators can propose something to be inserted in the 2014 bonding bill when the session starts later this fall and indicated it might make sense to wait to see where Met Council comes in with its recommendation for freight rail, adding this would also allow time for the City to determine what it wants from mitigation and whether to form a coalition with other cities. Mr. Locke advised that staff would present a draft of the City’s comments for review by Council next week. 2. 2012 Financial Statements – Auditors Discussion and Review Mr. Swanson presented the staff report and introduced David Mol, CPA, from HLB Tautges Redpath, Ltd. Mr. Mol advised that the reports issued by the auditor includes an opinion on the fair presentation of the financial statements, a report on internal controls, a report on compliance with the Minnesota legal compliance audit guide, and a report on communication to those charged with governance. He stated the financial statements are audited based on GAAS and GAGAS standards in order to obtain reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free of material misstatements and the City’s audit resulted in the issuance of a clean opinion or unmodified opinion. He indicated the City has received the GFOA award for excellence in financial reporting for several years and the 2012 financial statements will again be submitted. He stated the report on internal controls is intended to gain an understanding of internal controls in place and perform tests to determine compliance but does not audit or opine on the City’s internal controls. He advised that one item was noted related to revenue recognition and capital assets for revenue received from Hennepin County in 2012 for Northside Park that should have been recognized in the prior year when the project was started. Mr. Harmening explained that in this case, the City accounted for this revenue in 2012 instead of 2011. Mr. Swanson stated this revenue came in through the City’s CLASS system and was a non- routine item. He advised that staff will forward non-routine items to accounting staff to make sure the item is coded properly in the future. Mr. Mol stated the report on compliance with the Minnesota legal compliance audit guide resulted in no findings of noncompliance after a sample of transactions were tested for compliance in seven categories, e.g., depositories of funds and investments requires that dollars on deposit at a financial institution be covered by FDIC or collateral and the audit tests for compliance with that section. He advised the auditors noted a change in how the City accounts for capital assets with the City moving to a Modified Approach with no recording of depreciation and instead recording the capital asset. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 5 Title: Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 17, 2013 Mr. Swanson stated the City uses the Modified Approach in the Pavement Management Fund because the City has solid tracking of assets and costs in this Fund. He stated the City is looking to expand the use of the Modified Approach in its trails system and utility systems. Mr. Mol advised that accounting estimates in the financial statements include an obligation for post-employment benefits of $1.6 million. He stated the financial statements include two immaterial adjustments including understatement of property taxes receivable and explained this relates to how Hennepin County provides the information to the City; for the period 2007-2010 the County was reporting a negative receivable. He advised that staff spoke with the County to make sure there was not a payable and learned the negative receivable is how the County handles their adjustments related to property owners with contested valuations and in this case, the amount was $86,000. Mr. Swanson explained that when a property owner is involved in a tax court case and the property value is reduced, the County takes it out of the City’s delinquent tax settlement numbers rather than having a separate line item on the County’s tax settlement numbers. He added that Mr. Mol and staff would work with the County to resolve this issue. Mr. Mol advised that no disagreements or difficulties with management were encountered in performing the audit. He then presented a 2012 financial summary showing the 12/31/12 ending fund balance of $109,871,000 and cash balance of $68,902,000. Mr. Swanson stated the General Fund target is 45% and came in at 45.16% and pointed out this includes transferring over $1 million from the General Fund. He stated the Special Revenue Funds remain stable and have had no significant cash outflows; the Capital Projects Fund overall position has declined due to completion of the fire station projects and represents a planned declination in the fund balance; the Enterprise Fund remains stable due to an increase in rates to plan for future capital needs; and the Internal Service Fund decreased slightly due to uninsured losses. Mr. Mol reviewed 2012 revenue sources and 2012 expenditures for all funds as well as constraints on the fund balance totaling $61 million. He explained that these constraints are for items not available for spending, e.g., the housing rehab fund represents loans issued by the City and not available for reuse until the loans are collected. He advised the General Fund has unassigned funds of $10,757,000 and the City’s policy is to maintain 35-50% of its operating budget in the fund balance. He reviewed General Fund working capital needs, history of the General Fund balance as well as the City’s outstanding debt at year end. He then reviewed the City’s Enterprise Funds and history of the City’s tax levy and tax rates stating that the City is a net contributor to fiscal disparities with 4.7% of tax capacity contributed elsewhere in the metro. He indicated the City had overall good results for the 2012 audit with a clean opinion. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger expressed the City Council’s thanks to Mr. Mol and Mr. Swanson. The meeting adjourned at 7:27 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Susan Sanger, Mayor Pro Tem Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Minutes: 3b UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA JUNE 24, 2013 The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia Ross (arrived at 6:39 p.m.), Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Jake Spano (arrived at 6:35 p.m.). Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human Resources (Ms. Deno), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), Controller (Mr. Swanson), Finance Supervisor (Mr. Heintz), Associate Planner (Mr. Kelly), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Burr). 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – July 1 & 8, 2013 Mr. Harmening presented the staff report, proposed special study session agenda for July 1, 2013, and the proposed study session agenda for July 8, 2013. Mr. Harmening reported that on July 1, 2013, a joint meeting will be held with the School Board. Wooddale Flats will not be on the agenda. He noted that on July 8th there will be another LRT update with a special meeting afterwards to adopt the official comments on the freight rail issue. Councilmember Mavity stated she would like to discuss the National League of Cities meeting in Seattle this year. 2. Deer Management Update This item was postponed. 3. Southwest LRT Update Mr. Harmening introduced the Southwest LRT update and noted Mr. Locke will be leading the discussion. Mr. Locke began by stating staff continues to determine and illustrate key facts related to the LRT/ freight rail issue. He distributed a redline copy of the comments as well as the letter, noting there is nothing substantively different, other than a correction to an error indicating three elementary schools rather than four. He indicated the biggest section of changes is the language on safety impacts, especially relating to safety issues for raised tracks. Mr. Locke summarized that the bulk of the key issues concerning the two alternative relocation routes and things that need to be mitigated. Councilmember Hallfin commended staff for its work on the letter and the changes made. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 24, 2013 Councilmember Spano arrived at 6:35 p.m. Councilmember Hallfin suggested removing any reference to cost with regard to tunnels, since it is unknown whether or not tunnels are more costly. Councilmember Ross arrived 6:39 pm. Councilmember Mavity discussed the issue of co-location and whether grade separation is actually the issue. She stated co-location can be viable, but not unless there is a grade separation for traffic to get through. The underpass proposal for some kind of traffic must be included in order to make traffic viable at Wooddale. She discussed the traffic delays for the LRT (of only 1 to 2 minutes) and for freight, which would be 10-minute delays, five or six times daily, and would therefore necessitate an underpass. Councilmember Mavity discussed the importance of grade separation at Wooddale for freight trains. The Council discussed whether grade separation should be required. Councilmember Santa emphasized the importance of requiring a grade separation now in order to include it in the project costs. Mr. Locke summarized that staff will include language for a grade separation at Xenwood or Yosemite Avenues. Councilmember Mavity suggested several changes throughout the document, including: removing the words “or other means,” adding verbiage related to a possible northern connection, modifying language to reflect “this should be a process funded and resolved by the LRT,” and adding language to ensure playgrounds must be replaced, and access to football fields must be resolved. She offered several additional suggestions, including language emphasizing the importance of minimizing loss of locally owned businesses; she also suggested deleting the rest of the sentence on number 24 in the Property Impacts Section after “including potentially expanding parking in the area” because there may be other opportunities. Councilmember Mavity suggested a change to the letter stating the project is not viable without grade separation at Wooddale; the Council stated it is still viable and did not agree to this suggested change. Councilmember Spano observed that the language regarding property acquisition should read “must” rather than “should.” Councilmember Ross stated she is disappointed there are no figures available currently; when those numbers come in, she wants to include them to show it is probably cheaper to co-locate freight and light rail. Councilmember Sanger stated she does not believe the list of issues is complete. She noted that currently, TC&W is running trains north five days a week, which is contrary to the current language. Mr. Locke stated those are CP, not TC&W trains. Councilmember Sanger asked staff to clarify the statement and make it accurate. She also mentioned that the City has requested that the Bass Lake spur storage tracks be removed, but there is nowhere else to put them. Mr. Locke stated the SWLRT plans rest on the Bass Lake spur storage tracks being removed. Councilmember Sanger stated she would like specificity on how mitigation would be provided for tracks that are 20 feet up in the air and would like to require a derailment study to discuss elevated track risks compared with derailment risks at grade level. She questioned whether a 100-foot right-of-way is sufficient, and requested an apples-to-apples comparison by the Met City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 3 Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 24, 2013 Council with other light rail lines. Mr. Locke noted the challenge of possibly acquiring another 40 homes for an expanded right-of-way. Ms. McMonigal stated the goal in that section was to be consistent with previous Council comments, and Councilmember Sanger stated things have changed in light of the current freight rail route proposals. Councilmember Sanger stated the language should clarify if the 100 feet is between property lines or between homes. Mr. Locke responded that it is 100 feet of right-of-way and indicated the language can be crafted to ensure accuracy. Mr. Harmening commented that staff is not here to debate the issue but rather ask for direction. Councilmember Mavity noted the 100 feet is reflected in the DEIS comments as well. Taking another row of homes would have to have a very compelling reason. Councilmember Sanger indicated it should state 100 feet from any property lines. Councilmember Hallfin stated right now, there are buildings much closer than that to the tracks. Councilmember Sanger stated some houses are closer to the tracks than others, but not necessarily every house. She wants to ensure every house keeps its whole backyard so that there backyard is not included in the right-of-way measurement. Mr. Locke stated the maps can be brought back before the Council if that is helpful. The Council agreed that would be helpful. Mayor Jacobs directed staff to bring it back with the maps. Councilmember Sanger continued with several more suggestions for language changes related to the impact on locally owned business, traffic mitigation, if any TIF district will be impacted, and the importance of noise and vibration studies. Councilmember Santa suggested stronger language regarding storm water plans and drainage issues. Councilmember Mavity asked Mr. Locke to include DEIS comments on the side in the next draft before the Council. Councilmember Mavity asked staff to bring back best practices on how to get folks to stations, especially as it relates to keeping things at grade level. The Council discussed whether the main point of the LRT is moving people from point A to point B, economic development, or a combination of both. 4. 2014 Budget Discussion Ms. Deno stated no action is required tonight; rather, this is a discussion to ensure staff is “between the lines” going forward. She provided an overview of the timeline, budget recommendations, and guiding principles, highlighting that the five union contracts are open this year. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 4 Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 24, 2013 Mr. Swanson discussed the levy limits in place, as outlined on page 2 of the packet. The levy limits were put in for one year, 2014, at 3%. He noted the figure is less any local government aid received, so the net levy increase available to the City is approximately $282,000. Councilmember Santa asked how fiscal disparity plays into that figure. Mr. Swanson explained that the levy limit and fiscal disparity do not have a correlation. Councilmember Sanger asked whether the City has enough money for a 2% wage increase plus benefits increase. Ms. Deno responded that staff will use the local aid as a contributing factor to the budget. Mr. Harmening added that the budget can work as long as there is not a change in service delivery. Councilmember Spano noted the Council has placed a high value on planning/engineering for Highway 100. Councilmember Sanger asked about money included for feasibility planning for the potential community center. She also suggested setting aside money for legal fees for the LRT. Mr. Swanson responded the development fund will absorb community center funds. Ms. Deno made a note of possible legal fees related to the LRT. Mr. Swanson discussed the previous two-year plan and the capital replacement fund. Councilmember Mavity asked staff to come back and report how the budget is coming along, and Ms. Deno stated staff will return and show how the “puzzle” fits together. Mr. Swanson noted that staff has worked to help reduce the volatility in building permit revenues by assigning fund balance within the General Fund, which can be utilized if revenues don’t meet budget. Councilmember Santa encouraged the staff to keep the Council realistic in terms of budget feasibility. Mr. Harmening noted that the community center’s operating costs will be seven figures, though that figure will be offset somewhat by revenue. Mr. Heintz indicated the Met Council grant is simply a pass-through for the sanitary sewer project. Ms. Deno presented an overview of the General Fund and Park and Rec Fund. Mr. Swanson noted the City’s overall financial position has not declined in terms of available resources. Councilmember Mavity asked about staffing at dispatch. Ms. Deno responded that dispatch is holding, except for the staffing situation, and there are some good candidates. Mr. Harmening added that overall staffing is lean, but the dispatchers have acclimated. Councilmember Sanger asked about a need for additional resources in public works and community development. Ms. Deno indicated some of those areas are called out for special attention, and discussions have been held regarding whether two public engineers are needed. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 5 Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 24, 2013 Councilmember Sanger added that if there is a need for additional staff, the Council will support it. Councilmember Sanger stated that she plans to revisit the sidewalk issue in relation to snowplowing on sidewalks and whether the City should take that over. 5. Wooddale Flats Comprehensive Plan Amendment from CIV Civic to RM Medium Density Residential Mr. Harmening introduced the report, noting this proposal has gone before the Planning Commission, which recommended approval. It was scheduled for next Monday, but has since been removed from the agenda. Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report, noting the next step for this proposal is to come before the Council on July 15 for approval. She noted staff recommends approving the Comp Plan Amendment. Councilmember Mavity reported that she attended both meetings the developer had with neighbors. The neighbors expressed a significant number of issues at the first meeting, especially regarding traffic and height of the building. The developer came back to the second meeting, and support seemed to increase. Councilmember Hallfin concurred, noting more people seemed to be on board with the plan due to changes made by the developer. Ms. McMonigal stated the traffic study shows there is not an increase in traffic from previous use to the new use. Councilmember Santa asked about the number of bedrooms in each unit. Mr. Kelley responded that the plan calls for two- and three-bedroom units with a price point of $325,000 to $500,000. Councilmember Spano stated he likes the lack of traffic increase and also likes that they are not rentals. He asked about playground equipment. Councilmember Hallfin noted the current playground is there, and the City did not want to take it over. Councilmember Sanger asked whether the developer is asking for TIF, and Mr. Kelley responded he is not. Councilmember Sanger suggested the development agreement should be ironclad regarding owner-occupation of the units. Councilmember Mavity expressed support for the project as it is a new housing option not currently available in St. Louis Park. Councilmember Hallfin stated the proposed housing units are in his neighborhood, and he expressed significant concern about the impact on traffic in an already congested area. He noted that Excelsior Boulevard and Wooddale traffic is awful and needs to be figured out. He also expressed support for commercial rather than residential units, while also noting that 41st Street is an interesting engineering issue for sidewalks. Councilmember Spano noted the traffic at the intersection is an issue independent of this development. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 6 Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 24, 2013 Mr. Kelley noted the traffic study is being revised by the consultant. In terms of daily trips, the estimation is 198 from this project, compared to a range of 139 to 238 for school use. The original plan had the two parking lots connected, but there was concern at the first meeting that it was a bad idea, so it was taken out. Staff has discussed putting it back in to help with traffic. Councilmember Hallfin commented it is a nice-looking project, though it may not be the best use of this land. Mayor Jacobs concurred that the intersection of Excelsior Boulevard and Wooddale is awful and has to be fixed. Mr. Harmening stated this project will allow the City to look at that issue. He noted it is a highly complex system of traffic signal system in that area, and is probably doing the best it can do. Ms. McMonigal stated there were a few recommendations from the traffic consultants not related to this project, and staff will look at them. Mayor Jacobs stated that removing the right-out will solve the problem. Councilmember Mavity reiterated that this is a good project and adds value to the City. Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal) Mr. Harmening passed around a thank-you card from the residents of 41st Street. He asked whether any Councilmembers had questions about storm clean-up. Councilmember Spano thanked Mr. Harmening and Mr. Zwilling for coordinating the curb-side pickup. Councilmember Sanger stated the crews have done a great job, but her concern is getting information to residents without internet access. She has received several calls from residents not understanding what the City has been doing to clean up. She suggested the City publish a summary of clean-up efforts when it is completed. She also suggested discussing underground lines with Xcel Energy. Mr. Harmening suggested an Xcel representative come in before the Council. Mayor Jacobs stated in 1986, the City adopted a policy in support of undergrounding the electrical lines. Mr. Harmening noted the City has 300 block captains and numerous association representatives, some of whom are helping distribute flyers. Mr. Zwilling stated the flyer to be distributed will outline the tree and brush pick-up timeline, with a second round of pickup in a week or two, as well as communication from Excel that the power should be turned on by Wednesday. Councilmember Sanger noted she has been impressed with neighbors helping each other. Councilmember Spano asked about a list of licensed contractors for tree removal, and Mr. Zwilling responded that information will be included on the flyer. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 7 Title: Study Session Meeting Minutes of June 24, 2013 Mr. Harmening indicated the City will cut down the boulevard trees for homeowners and then ask the homeowner to file a claim through the City’s insurance policy. Mayor Jacobs expressed appreciation for all the clean-up efforts so far. Mr. Harmening noted it is not advised by the engineering community to put up portable four-way stoplights when stoplights are down. Zac Farber was introduced as the new Patch editor. Councilmember Sanger reported she received an invitation to attend a meeting regarding the Kenilworth corridor area and what happened at the Met Council open house. She noted she will be attending as an individual and not as a Councilmember. Councilmember Mavity stated she recently attended the Minnesota League of Cities conference and had lunch with the Hopkins’ City Council, who discussed the value in all attending the national conference each year. She noted that the national annual meeting will be in Seattle in November. Councilmember Sanger stated she attended the conference a few years ago, and her experience was that it was of mixed value for the City’s money. She noted there is another League of Cities meeting in Washington, D.C., concerning national issues, which may be of greater interest. The meeting adjourned at 8:51 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 6. May 2013 Monthly Financial Report 7. Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds 8. Proposed Modification to the Victoria Ponds Tax Increment Financing District Plan SLP 9. Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Parking Uses ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Minutes: 3c UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA JULY 1, 2013 1. Call to Order Mayor Pro Tem Sanger called the meeting to order at 6:39 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Susan Sanger, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia Ross, Sue Santa, and Jake Spano. Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Finance Supervisor (Mr. Heintz), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes). 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations - None 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes June 10, 2013 Councilmember Hallfin requested that the fourth full paragraph on page 6 be revised to state “Councilmember Hallfin stated that City Council Resolution No. 10-070 lays out the City’s position, most notably that the City opposes the rerouting of freight rail traffic from the Kenilworth corridor to St. Louis Park unless there are no other viable options and indicated the SPO has indicated there are other viable options already showed that other viable options exist. He added the City has established its position and this position has not changed.” The minutes were approved as amended. 3b. City Council Meeting Minutes June 17, 2013 Councilmember Mavity requested that the first sentence of the eleventh paragraph on page 13 be revised to state “Councilmember Mavity stated Council needs more information on many of these segments and did not want to make a final decision without that information.” Councilmember Hallfin requested that the first sentence of the first full paragraph on page 14 be revised to state “Councilmember Hallfin stated he lives on 41st Street where a sidewalk is proposed and pointed out that the segment from Susan Lindgren School to Brookside is the only section that does not have a sidewalk this is the only section of 41st Street from Susan Lindgren School to Highway 100 that does not have a sidewalk.” City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 2 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of July 1, 2013 Mayor Pro Tem Sanger requested that the fifth full paragraph on page 14 be revised to add an additional sentence that states “She also stated she received feedback from several residents in the 2800 block of Ottawa and there was no consensus regarding whether or where to construct a sidewalk on this block.” The minutes were approved as amended. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. 4a. Moved to Item 8b 4b. Designate G.L. Contracting, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $469,688.68 for the France Avenue Improvements, Project No. 2010-0005. 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 13-098 accepting donations to the Fire Department. 4d. Authorize execution of a contract with Rehrig Pacific in the amount of $798,837.00 for the purchase of recycling and organic waste carts. 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 13-099 authorizing final payment in the amount of $3,170.50 and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 15 (Acoustical Ceilings) for Project Nos. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002, City Contract No. 66-11. 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 13-100 authorizing final payment in the amount of $4,418.75 and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 04 (Precast Concrete) for Project No. 2008-3001, City Contract No. 39-11. 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 13-101 authorizing final payment in the amount of $115,274.84 and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 03 (Cast-in-Place Concrete/Masonry) for Project Nos. 2008-3001 & 2008-3002, City Contract No. 78-11. 4h. Adopt Resolution No. 13-102 modifying the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Victoria Ponds TIF District and authorizing the use of the remaining pooling funds. 4i. Approve for filing Housing Authority Meeting Minutes April 10, 2013. 4j. Approve for filing Vendor Claims. Councilmember Mavity requested that Consent Calendar item 4a be removed for discussion. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar as amended to move Consent Calendar item 4a to the regular agenda as item 8b; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Jacobs absent). City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 3 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of July 1, 2013 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. Defeasance of the 2004A Bonds. Resolution No. 13-103. Mr. Heintz presented the staff report and noted the EDA took action on this item earlier this evening. He added the redemption of the bonds is scheduled for August 5, 2013. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to adopt Resolution No. 13-103 Providing for the Prepayment and Redemption of the City’s Outstanding General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2004A. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Jacobs absent). 8b. Designating Polling Places and Appointing Election Judges for 2013 Elections. Resolution No. 13-104. Councilmember Mavity indicated it was her understanding that Hennepin County recently purchased its new voting equipment and is in the process of having the equipment certified by the Secretary of State so the County can use the equipment in its ranked choice voting. She pointed out the City leases this equipment from Hennepin County and is closer to being able to do ranked choice voting in St. Louis Park, adding she wanted to bring this to Council’s attention as something Council might want to look at for the future. It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to adopt Resolution No. 13-104 Designating Polling Places and Appointing Election Judges for the Primary and General Elections of 2013. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Jacobs absent). Mr. Harmening stated the new voting machines are capable of some features helpful in administering an RCV election. However, the machines are not capable of automatically tabulating the winners of an RCV election and counting would still have to be done by hand. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger suggested that the City wait until after the Minneapolis election and see how it goes with the new machines and have a study session discussion next year. 9. Communications Councilmember Spano requested an update on the final payments being made on the Fire Station project. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 4 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of July 1, 2013 Mr. Harmening explained the City was the general contractor on the Fire Station project and entered into over thirty contracts with subcontractors. He stated the City is in the process of closing out and approving final payment on all the contracts, noting that each contractor has to meet certain requirements before final payment is made. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger expressed thanks to the entire community for pulling together and helping each other after the recent storm. She also expressed appreciation to those volunteers from other communities who came in to help. She thanked the City staff for their efforts in clearing roads and getting rid of downed trees and stated the City should be appreciative of all the City staff for how well this was handled. Mr. Harmening stated that City staff has done a phenomenal job and indicated there is still a lot of work to be done and requested that residents be patient as City staff works through the community. He expressed thanks to the cities of Edina and Richfield and Hennepin County for contributing staff and equipment to help with the cleanup. Councilmember Spano stated he recently met with Rabbi Borenstein at Torah Academy to discuss their major renovation and Rabbi Borenstein asked if Council would be interested in hearing about all the things they have planned. He suggested having Rabbi Borenstein come in and discuss the project with Council including how the project might impact people in the area that use the parking lot adjacent to the playground and the soccer field. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger suggested that Torah Academy send information to Council about what they are doing. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Susan Sanger, Mayor Pro Tem Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Minutes: 3d UNOFFICIAL MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA JULY 1, 2013 1. Call to Order Mayor Pro Tem Sanger called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Susan Sanger, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia Ross, Sue Santa, and Jake Spano. Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs. School Board Members present: Chair Bruce Richardson, Vice Chair Nancy Gores, Ken Morrison, Larry Shapiro, Julie Sweitzer, Joe Tatalovich, and Jim Yarosh. City Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Organizational Development Coordinator (Ms. Gothberg), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes). 2. Introductions Mayor Pro Tem Sanger introduced Ms. Bridget Gothberg, Organizational Development Coordinator. The Councilmembers and School Board members then introduced themselves. 3. Remarks from the Mayor Pro Tem and School Board Chair School Board Chair Richardson stated the School Board was pleased to meet with the City Council this evening. He indicated the new School Superintendent, Rob Metz, was unable to attend this evening due to a prior commitment. 4. SWLRT/Freight Rail: Discuss overall issues, comments, and formulate a position statement Mr. Locke presented the draft list of key issues on freight rail alternatives and draft letter to Met Council SPO. He distributed several maps depicting existing and future freight rail car volumes, existing and future freight rail at-grade crossings, changes in track height for Brunswick West and Brunswick Central, and freight rail track construction for Brunswick West and Brunswick Central. He also distributed a flyer regarding two public community meetings being sponsored by the SPO on July 17 and 18. He stated the SPO would be presenting the most viable freight rail routes to the Citizens Advisory Committee and Business Advisory Committee and then the Corridor Management Committee with the final decision coming from Met Council the end of August. He indicated the letter and comments incorporate all of the comments from previous meetings including the question raised by Council regarding the number of parcels that need to be acquired along the MN&S route in order to create a 100’ wide corridor. He stated the City has included a graphic that was used in the City’s DEIS comments that illustrates these parcels and the comments point out that it includes properties north of Minnetonka Boulevard up to the City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 2 Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 1, 2013 27th Street right-of-way. He advised the City anticipates that cost estimates will be available toward the end of July adding that our understanding is that the cost estimates will become public information once this information reaches the technical project advisory committee. Councilmember Mavity asked City staff to request that Met Council officially provide the City with this information the moment it becomes public and to also request that Met Council present this information to Council at a study session or City Council meeting. Mr. Locke agreed to make this request to the SPO. School Board Member Yarosh stated at their last School Board meeting, the SPO representative agreed that before determining the freight rail route the SPO needs a plan for the high school football field. He asked if City staff believes that more information will be made available before the recommendation is made to Met Council. Mr. Locke stated the City’s goal is to submit its comments before the SPO has finished its recommendation regarding freight rail in the hope that the City’s concerns would influence the SPO’s recommendation. Mr. Harmening stated the City’s draft letter indicates the City does not support the reroute options currently on the table, and the City feels there is a viable option that exists in the Kenilworth corridor with colocation. School Board Chair Richardson stated the School Board agrees with the City’s position and feels the City has done an excellent job in preparing its letter and comments. He presented a letter listing several areas that the School Board would like to address and stated the School District’s #1 concern is the safety of students, parents, and staff. He indicated the proposed reroute comes through their campus and the tenfold increase in train traffic is not acceptable. He stated the loss of the football field represents a significant impact and the proposed reroute goes right by one of the elementary schools and the 30’ rise in elevation is unacceptable. He indicated the impact to the ECFE Center and PSI is also significant and noted that Peter Hobart School would be cut off from its neighborhood. He stated that safety, noise, vibration, and environmental impacts are issues requiring mitigation, and the School Board has not heard anything about what would be mitigated and who would be responsible for this mitigation. He advised there are operational aspects of running the schools, especially buses, and the School Board is concerned about impacts during and after construction. He reiterated the School Board does not support any of the options as presented to relocate freight rail through the City. School Board Member Sweitzer stated she remains concerned about all the money being spent on the project and that there will not be enough money left for mitigation. She stated the elevated route is of significant concern to her and indicated she has not heard enough about the impact of the elevated route. She indicated her biggest concern is safety and having an elevated train so close to the school as well as concerns about the football field. Councilmember Hallfin stated the public information meetings on July 17-18 include 45 minutes for Q&A and he has heard from residents that that is not enough time. He asked City staff to find out if the SPO will answer all questions at the public information meetings. He stated the City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 10-070 that opposes the reroute if there are other viable alternatives and if no other viable options exist, then there must be sufficient mitigation and the City Council has not wavered from that resolution. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 3 Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 1, 2013 School Board Member Shapiro stated the School Board feels very strongly that the proposed reroute is not good for the School District or for the City as a whole. He stated the reroute cuts through the middle of the City and he has significant concerns about safety and the elevated track and he has not seen any mitigation. He was also concerned about safety if a train derails on the elevated track. Councilmember Ross stated the City Council has been clear that it would be open to looking at all options but if a viable option other than the MN&S route exists then the City Council opposes the reroute, adding the City’s independent study as well as the other studies that have been done indicate there are other viable options. She stated she would not support moving the freight trains and rerouting them through neighborhoods. School Board Member Tatalovich stated his agreement with the draft letter and comments and commended the City Council and staff for preparing a thorough document that addresses the School Board’s concerns. Councilmember Spano referenced the maps depicting freight rail track construction and stated these maps show that over half of the new alignment includes track and right-of-way where there previously was no track and it was important to recognize there are residents who are unfamiliar with how this is going to work. He stated this issue was pointed out during meetings with members of the City’s federal delegation and the City has sent letters to the City’s congressional delegation, as well as U.S. Rep. Tim Walz and U.S. Rep. Rick Nolan, who are members of the House of Representatives Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, to make them aware of the City’s concerns. He stated the SWLRT project had a budget established when the freight rail relocation was precluded from the discussion and when the FTA ordered that freight rail relocation be made a part of the project, the budget was never changed and expressed significant concern that there would not be enough money in the budget for mitigation. School Board Member Yarosh suggested that the City’s letter and comments be more aggressive in advocating the viability of colocation. He felt the football field issue was a nonstarter and expressed concerns about parking, noise, and the elevated track, adding that noise studies have not been done regarding the elevated track. Councilmember Mavity thanked City staff for their efforts in preparing the draft letter and comments. She expressed concern that the City does not yet have cost estimates and stated she understood that Met Council was on a fast track to get the project ready and to get federal funding, but wanted to make sure the City Council and the School Board receives the information it needs including cost estimates, especially since it appears there will not be enough money available and the City needs to understand exactly what that means. She agreed that the football field represents a significant issue that needs to be addressed. School Board Member Morrison agreed with the concerns raised by the other members of the School Board and stated the first priority is the students. He was concerned about running a train so close to the schools and the elevated track was also a concern. He stated that having an elevated train going through the middle of the City is a concern for the community as a whole. Councilmember Santa stated the City’s comments reference the softening of side-slopes and indicated she had a hard time envisioning how large the base of a berm would be where the train is running on tracks elevated by an earthen berm. She questioned how much right-of-way would City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 4 Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 1, 2013 be buffer area as opposed to simply room to accommodate berm for elevating the tracks. She expressed concern about the effects on the community in either a colocation or relocation scenario and the impacts on the school system, e.g., getting buses to and from the schools on time and getting kids to the classroom on time with the least amount of disruption. She stated that under either option there will be impacts rippling through the system, including impacts on streets, sidewalks, and the way people get around the community. She wanted to make sure that the City remains mindful of the potential impacts on the systems that pull the community together both from a City perspective and a School District perspective. School Board Vice Chair Gores pointed out the football field and stadium is used for other activities, e.g., lacrosse and graduation ceremonies, and is the soul of the School District. It has a much larger implication than just impacts on football. She was concerned about the disruption to classes if the football field was relocated as well as the construction aspect. She indicated the School District has staggered school start times so the same buses can run several routes to keep costs down and free up money for classrooms. She stated the City’s letter talks about circulation impacts and the School Board has concerns in either a colocation or relocation scenario about how traffic will be disrupted during construction and the potential of having kids getting stuck at bus stops and waiting in the cold dark weather for buses and the potential for massive disruption. She stated the School Board was hopeful the City could help manage this issue and find ways to mitigate this potential disruption. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger felt that both reroute options were disruptive, inappropriate, unnecessary, and expensive and felt there were better alternatives available. She suggested that the City’s letter be modified to indicate the City needs all this information before it can consider municipal consent rather than before it can approve municipal consent. She also felt the City’s letter should be stronger in its statement that the City cannot consider these options fairly until it receives additional information to make a realistic choice. She felt the City’s letter needed to point out that the City was not able to consider freight rail in its previous decision and the City cannot address the routing issue without full information about colocation and reroute options and implications to the community to address concerns being raised, adding that whichever route is chosen, it would be difficult to approve without cost estimates. Councilmember Hallfin indicated there was some earlier discussion another a possible option for freight rail in the future heading up north and further west of the Twin Cities and felt it was important to know there are other options that could happen in the future with freight rail. Councilmember Spano stated the idea of routing trains toward Glencoe was raised as a means to effectively remove freight from the community. School Board Member Yarosh felt the City should be more assertive in saying this is an option that should remain open and the City should articulate that argument more aggressively in its letter and comments with the caveat that the City is making this argument without cost estimates. Councilmember Ross disagreed that trains could be removed entirely from St. Louis Park and stated the trains would be simply shifted to the BNSF tracks from the Bass Lake Spur, adding she was concerned about the significant impact to Ward 4 of putting 1,580 more rail cars per week on the BNSF track. Councilmember Santa stated the City of Glencoe was not in favor of moving the switching wye to Glencoe noting this is where TC&W is headquartered. She agreed there would always be City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 5 Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 1, 2013 trains in St. Louis Park and the issue remains whether there is sufficient mitigation. She agreed with School Board Member Yarosh’s suggestion to push the colocation option but was frustrated that the City did not have enough fact-based arguments in favor of colocation. School Board Chair Richardson expressed appreciation to everyone who has worked on this and requested that the City Council and School Board recognize the efforts of former School Board Member Rolf Peterson who remains active with the School Board and City on SWLRT. School Board Vice Chair Gores suggested that the School Board send a letter to the SPO more tailored to the School District issues. 5. Discussion of topics for future joint meetings Councilmember Mavity suggested that a joint meeting be scheduled in approximately one month to consider the cost estimates and to schedule another meeting after the SPO makes its recommendations to discuss next steps and strategy. She also suggested that a future joint meeting include discussion about housing and school patterns. School Board Member Yarosh suggested that a future joint meeting include discussion about the School District referenda. School Board Member Morrison suggested that a future joint meeting include discussion about the availability of activity spaces in the City. It was the consensus of the City Council and School Board to schedule a joint meeting on Monday, July 29, 2013, and to request that a representative from the SPO attend this meeting, with the understanding that this meeting may be rescheduled if information is not yet available from the SPO. It was also the consensus of the City Council and School Board to schedule a joint meeting on Monday, August 5, 2013, as the backup date to July 29, 2013. It was also the consensus of the City Council and School Board to discuss SWLRT and the School District referenda at its next joint meeting and to discuss housing/school patterns at a meeting in the fall. 6. Other Councilmember Mavity requested clarification regarding the supplemental DEIS process and whether public input will be part of that process. Mr. Locke advised it was his understanding that during a Federal Supplemental DEIS there is not opportunity for public input on the scope of the Supplemental DEIS, but there is a 45-day comment period on the completed supplemental DEIS. He added he felt that the recommendation regarding freight rail routing and the municipal consent plans would be done before the supplemental DEIS is completed. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger indicated that in the last several weeks she has heard Met Council staff state publicly that the freight rail reroute is not part of the municipal consent process and requested that staff follow up on what that means. Mr. Locke agreed to ask the SPO to provide clarification regarding the supplemental DEIS. 7. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:38 p.m. Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License – Church of the Holy Family RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Church of the Holy Family at 5900 & 5925 West Lake Street for August 10, 2013. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council agree with staff’s recommendation to approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Church of the Holy Family during their annual Family Festival to be held Saturday, August 10, 2013? BACKGROUND: The Church of the Holy Family has made application for a Temporary On- Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for their annual Family Festival event scheduled for August 10, 2013. The event will take place under a tent at the Holy Family Academy parking lot, 5925 West Lake Street, from 2:00 pm to midnight. 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. Attachments: None Prepared by: Kay Midura, Office Assistant - Administration Reviewed by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License - Frank Lundberg American Legion RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Frank Lundberg American Legion Post 282, 5605 36th St. W. in St. Louis Park, for their Annual Anniversary Celebration to be held July 27 and 28, 2013, in the parking lot at the American Legion. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to approve the temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for the Frank Lundberg American Legion for their Annual Anniversary Celebration being held in the American Legion parking lot July 27 and 28, 2013? BACKGROUND: The Frank Lundberg American Legion Post 282 has applied for a temporary liquor license for their Annual Anniversary Celebration to be held on Saturday, July 27, from 8:00 pm to 11:00 pm, and Sunday, July 28, from 12:00 noon to 6:00 pm, in the American Legion’s parking lot located at 5605 36th St. W. The parking lot will be fenced off and tented for the event. 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. Attachments: None Prepared by: Kay Midura, Office Assistant – Administration Reviewed by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: State Aid Street Designation – Wayzata Boulevard RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution designating Wayzata Boulevard between Ford Road and the west city limit as a Municipal State Aid Street. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None. A report describing this proposed action was provided to Council on July 8, 2013. This action is consistent with practices and policies regarding Municipal State Aid streets. SUMMARY: MnDOT is currently in the process of formally turning back Wayzata Blvd. (I- 394 North Frontage Road) to the cities of Minnetonka and St. Louis Park. As a result Minnetonka has taken action with the MnDOT State Aid Office to designate a portion of the north frontage road as a Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) between Hopkins Crossroad and their east city limit (St. Louis Park). For a street to receive MSAS designation however, it must terminate at each end with another State Aid Street, State Highway, or County Highway. In order to allow for this MSA designation to be approved in Minnetonka, a short segment of the same roadway in St. Louis Park must also be designated an MSA route. As a result, the City of St. Louis Park is similarly requesting designation of the frontage road to an MSA route between the west City limit (City of Minnetonka) and Ford Road, which is already designated as a State Aid roadway. MnDOT State Aid staff has reviewed the City’s request and will conditionally approve this designation request upon receipt of a City Council resolution ordering the same. MnDOT is also in the process of officially conveying the frontage road right of ways to both cities, hence the designation will officially take effect upon completion of that process, expected to be completed later this year. The City of St. Louis Park currently has 1.08 miles of excess mileage available for designation and therefore has no issue with the 0.21 miles needed to fulfill the request. A Commissioner’s Order will follow from MnDOT upon receiving the City Council resolution. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Map Resolution Prepared by: Scott A. Brink, City Engineer and Interim Director of Engineering Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4c) Page 2 Title: State Aid Street Designation – Wayzata Boulevard DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: When I-394 was constructed in the 1990’s all adjacent communities agreed to take over frontage roads constructed as a part of the project once construction was completed. The cooperative agreement at the time provided for cities to assume ownership responsibilities once construction was completed and since then, St. Louis Park and adjacent communities have been maintaining the frontage roads as if they were theirs. However, a second and final part of that agreement called for MnDOT to prepare all necessary right of way and survey documents associated with those roads prior to their final release to the cities. That process has been slow to develop, but has been quietly occurring in communities west of St. Louis Park the past several years. MnDOT recently informed us that later this year they would be officially finishing the turnback process and providing us the respective documents for this. Once these roads are officially released from MnDOT, they are acknowledged as ours and that mileage becomes eligible for Municipal State Aid (MSA) designation. In order for a street segment to be eligible for designation as an MSA route, a street must terminate at another MSAS street, County highway, or State Highway. The city has not designated all the MSA mileage it could and currently has 1.08 miles available for this purpose. It has generally been presumed that some frontage roads would be designated as MSA routes when they were officially turned back to the city by MnDOT. Recently the City of Minnetonka has taken action with the MnDOT State Aid Office to designate a portion of the I-394 north frontage road (Wayzata Boulevard) as an MSA route between Hopkins Crossroad and their east City limit (St. Louis Park). However, in order for this segment to receive MSA designation it must terminate with another State Aid Street, a State Highway, or a County Roadway. To allow for this MSA designation to be approved in Minnetonka, a short segment of the same roadway in St. Louis Park (0.21 miles in length) must also be designated an MSA route between the City limit and Ford Road. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The city currently maintains this 0.21 mile segment of Wayzata Blvd. with general fund dollars. Once designated as MSA routes, MSA funds can be utilized for both maintenance and construction of these roads. So, this designation will be beneficial for General Fund purposes. NEXT STEPS: MnDOT State Aid staff has reviewed this request and will conditionally approve the designation request upon receipt of a City Council resolution ordering the same. Once the MnDOT turnbacks have occurred, a Commissioner’s Order will follow from MnDOT whereupon the MSA designation will become official. The City of St. Louis Park currently has 1.08 miles of excess mileage available for designation and therefore has no issue with the 0.21 miles needed to fulfill the request. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4c) Page 3 Title: State Aid Street Designation – Wayzata Boulevard City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4c) Page 4 Title: State Aid Street Designation – Wayzata Boulevard RESOLUTION NO. 13-____ RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET (Wayzata Boulevard (I-394 North Frontage Road) from the west city limits of St. Louis Park to Ford Road) WHEREAS, It appears to the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the street hereinafter described should be designated a Municipal State Aid Street under the provisions of Minnesota Law. NOW, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the road described as follows to-wit: Wayzata Blvd. (I-394 North Frontage Road) from the west city limits to Ford Road. Be, and hereby is established, located, and designated a Municipal State Aid Street of said City, subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota. BE IT FURTHER RESOVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for consideration, and that upon the Commissioner’s approval of the designation of said street or portion thereof, that same be constructed, improved, and maintained as a Municipal State Aid Street of the City of St. Louis Park. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 15, 2013 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4d EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Cedar Lake Road Bikeway Study Funding Agreement with Hennepin County RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing the City to enter into an agreement with Hennepin County for participation in a bikeway feasibility study for Cedar Lake Road between Highway 169 and Nevada Avenue, and on Virginia Avenue from Cedar Lake Road to the North Cedar Lake Regional Trail. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None. SUMMARY: On June 17, 2013, the City Council adopted and approved moving forward with the City-wide Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway Plan. Within the bikeway portion of the plan, Cedar Lake Road between Highway 169 and Louisiana Avenue, and Virginia Avenue between Cedar Lake Road and 28th Street were identified as high priorities, scheduled in the C.I.P. for delivery in 2013. Earlier this year, the City submitted an application to Hennepin County for participation from the County under the County’s program for providing monies to assist municipalities for feasibility studies for segments designated under both Hennepin County and local municipality bicycle transportation plans. The City’s successful application under the County’s program would provide for matching assistance from the County up to $20,000. In order to receive the matching funding, the City must enter into a Cooperative Agreement with Hennepin County, and a City Council resolution is required to authorize entering into the Agreement. The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and has no issues. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Funding has been identified for delivery of the Sidewalk, Bikeway, and Trail Plan. However, approval of this agreement will provide additional funding support for the engineering design portion for Cedar Lake Road and Virginia Avenue bikeways. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Scott A. Brink, City Engineer Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study Session Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4d) Page 2 Title: Cedar Lake Road Bikeway Study Funding Agreement with Hennepin County RESOLUTION NO. 13-____ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ENTERING INTO A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR COST PARTICIPATION FOR A BIKEWAY FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR CEDAR LAKE ROAD AND VIRGINA AVENUE WHEREAS, The City has requested County participation in the costs of studying the feasibility of an off-road bikeway along Cedar Lake Road from Trunk Highway 169 to Nevada Avenue South, and along Virginia Avenue South from Cedar Lake Road to the North Cedar Lake Regional Trail; and WHEREAS, Cedar Lake Road is designated as a bikeway in both the City of St. Louis Park Bike Plan and the Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, the costs of said feasibility study are eligible for participation under Hennepin County’s bikeway cost participation policy. NOW, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to sign and enter into a cooperative agreement, identified as Hennepin County Agreement No. PW 45-05-12, providing for cost participation by Hennepin County for costs incurred by the City for conducting a feasibility study for bikeway construction as described herein. BE IT FURTHER RESOVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Hennepin County Department of Public Works. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 15, 2013 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4e EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Minor Amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Costco Fueling Facility, with conditions recommended by staff. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the proposed Minor Amendment consistent with the zoning ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan? SUMMARY: A Minor Amendment to the PUD is requested to expand the number of pumps at the Costco Fueling Facility from six to nine. The subject lot is part of the PUD known as Park Place Plaza located on Cedar Lake Road between Zarthan Ave S and Park Place Blvd that contains Costco, Home Depot, OfficeMax, and other commercial uses. The property is zoned C-2 General Commercial and is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as Commercial. If approved, the three islands at the fueling facility would each be expanded by one additional pump for a total of nine pumps. The canopy over the pumps would also be extended by 28 feet. New signage would replace the existing signage on the sides of the canopy. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Location Map Draft Resolution Development Plans Prepared by: Jason Zimmerman, Community Development Intern Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 2 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The subject property is located in the Park Place Plaza PUD which is bounded by Cedar Lake Road on the south, Zarthan Ave S on the west, Park Place Blvd on the east, and 16th Street on the north. It is part of the Blackstone Neighborhood. The PUD was originally approved in 1989 and was amended most recently on June 17, 2013. The addition of the Costco Fueling Facility was approved through a major amendment to the PUD in August of 2001. As part of the approval, various traffic improvements were made to the site to improve safety and efficient circulation within the PUD. EXISTING CONDITIONS: Costco has operated the Fueling Facility since 2002. There are six gasoline pumps installed in three parallel islands. Each pump has two stations for a total of twelve stations on-site. The site is well landscaped and the pumps are heavily used. A canopy 88’ wide and 32’ deep covers the three existing islands. The facility is available only to Costco members and is monitored by an on-site attendant. PUD Analysis: The addition of three pumps would bring the total number of stations on the property to eighteen. Because they would be installed within the current stacking area, no parking spaces or landscaping would need to be removed. The proposed design and materials would be consistent with those used in the existing structure, satisfying the following criteria regarding the quality of building and site design within the PUD: A. The design shall consider the whole of the project and shall create a united environment within project boundaries by insuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulations, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and design and efficient use of utilities. Zoning Analysis: Signage. As part of the canopy addition, the current signage located on each of the four sides of the canopy will be replaced with new signage. Each sign will have an area of 19.7 square feet for a total of 78.8 square feet. Zoning regulations allow up to 100 square feet of signage in a C-2 district, so the proposal meets the size requirements. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 3 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard LOCATION MAP City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 4 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard RESOLUTION NO. 13-____ Amends and Restates Resolutions 96-89, 96-158, 97-3, 97-39, 98-23, 00-037, 00-133, 01-080, 02-072, 05-036, 13-095 A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 13-095 APPROVED ON JUNE 17, 2013, AMENDING A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 14:6-7 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 5600, 5640, 5680, 5700, 5800 and 5900 CEDAR LAKE ROAD; AND 1620, 1650, 1690 AND 1700 PARK PLACE BOULEVARD; AND 5601, 5699 AND 5799 WEST 16TH STREET AND1625 ZARTHAN AVENUE (TOTAL SITE FORMERLY KNOWN AS 1625 ZARTHAN AVENUE) PARK PLACE PLAZA WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Zoning Ordinance permits shopping centers in excess of 200,000 square feet by Planned Unit Development (PUD) under certain conditions in the C-2 Commercial Zoning District, and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 96-38 approving the Preliminary PUD on March 18, 1996, and WHEREAS, the City staff were informed on April 12, 1996 that certain environmental remediation would be necessary and such remediation would affect the timing process of demolition of the existing building and resulted in the need to amend the conditions of preliminary approval, and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 96-71 rescinding Resolution No. 96-38 and approving the Preliminary PUD subject to certain revised conditions on May 6, 1996, and WHEREAS, a complete application for a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received on April 26, 1996, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD application at the meeting of May 1, 1996, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD subject to 17 conditions of approval on a 3-1 vote with three members present voting in the affirmative and one member voting against, and WHEREAS, the City Council received an overview from City staff and the City Attorney of the necessary agreements related to the PUD at its May 13, 1996 Study Session, and WHEREAS, the applicant and current and prospective property owners have entered into a development agreement, supplemental development agreements, sidewalk easements agreement, reciprocal easement and operation agreement, and a reversion agreement, which City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 5 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard agreement nullifies and voids without any further action required on the part of the City Council the preliminary and final approval if certain conditions are not met, and WHEREAS, on March 3, 1997 Franchise Associates, Inc. (current owner of 1690 Park Place Boulevard) and Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc. as developer and with the consent of Honeywell, Inc. (fee owner of 1625 Zarthan Avenue) submitted an application for a minor amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow the use of neon on the building at 1690 Park Place Boulevard and to revise the Landscape Plan for 1625 Zarthan Avenue and 5600, 5640 and 5680 Cedar Lake Road, and WHEREAS, certain amendments to the approved Final PUD have been approved by the City Council on 10/22/96 (Res. 96-158) and 1/6/97 (Res 97-3), and 3/17/97 (Res 97-39), and WHEREAS, on December 11, 1997 Office Max (current owner of 5600 Cedar Lake Road) and Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc. as developer and with the consent of Honeywell, Inc. (fee owner of 1625 Zarthan Avenue) submitted an application for a minor amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow the placement of a new 12.8 s.f. flat wall identification sign on the east face of the building at 5600 Cedar Lake Road. WHEREAS, on February 22, 2000 Costco Wholesale and Ryan Companies US, Inc as developer with the consent of Honeywell, Inc. submitted an application for a major amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow the construction of a 139,444 square foot wholesale, retail and tire service facility at 5801 West 16th Street. WHEREAS, on October 23, 2000 Costco Wholesale and Ryan Companies US, Inc. as developer with the consent of Honeywell, Inc. submitted a minor amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow changes to the traffic improvements at 16th Street and the main access into the site. WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 01-133 on November 6, 2000 approving a minor amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow changes to the traffic improvements at 16th Street and the main access into the site, and WHEREAS, on April 16, 2001, Costco Wholesale filed an application seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to construct a fueling facility on Lot 9, and WHEREAS, on June 20, 2001, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 4-0 moved that the Planning Commission deny the proposed major amendment to the PUD, and WHEREAS, on July 16, 2001, the City Council considered the request for a major amendment, and on a vote of 7-0 moved to continue to the request, and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 01-080 on August 20, 2001 approving a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to construct a fueling facility on Lot 9, and City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 6 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard WHEREAS, on June 7, 2002, Costco Wholesale filed an application seeking a minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to construct a wholesale liquor addition on Lot 1, and WHEREAS, on December 2, 2004, Home Depot USA, Inc. filed an application seeking a minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to construct an addition of 5,764 square feet to the existing garden center on Lot 2, Block 1, Park Place Plaza, and WHEREAS, on May 9, 2013, Costco Wholesale filed an application seeking a minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to transfer land and parking spaces from Home Depot USA, Inc. (Lot 2, Block 1, Park Place Plaza) to Costco Wholesale (Lot 1, Block 1, Park Place Plaza), and WHEREAS, on June 7, 2013, Costco Wholesale filed an application seeking a minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to expand the fueling facility on Lot 9. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: A. Recitals The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein and made part of this resolution. B. Findings 1. Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc., as developer with the consent of the property owner Honeywell, Inc., has made application to the City Council for approval of a Final Planned Unit Development (“Final PUD”) within the C-2 General Commercial Zoning District under Section 14:6-7 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance for property formerly known as 1625 Zarthan Avenue for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Lots 1-9 and Outlots A, B and C; Block 1, Park Place Plaza (Torrens) 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 95-51-PUD) and the effect of the proposed Final PUD and amendments thereto 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, with specific consideration given to the Plan By Neighborhood Section of the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that approval of a Final PUD and the proposed amendments thereto will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also determined that the proposed Final PUD and amendments thereto are in harmony with the general provisions, purpose and intent of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and its Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 14:6-7.2(E). City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 7 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard 4. The contents of Planning Case Files 95-51-PUD, 02-38-PUD, and 04-70-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. C. Conditions and Approval A Final PUD at the location described in paragraph 1 of the above findings is approved based on the recitals and the findings set forth above, the Approved Final Plans, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Issuance of demolition and erosion control permits shall be subject to the following conditions as required in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Resolution and subsequently modified on March 18, 1996 and May 6, 1996 as follows: a. Demolition, hauling and construction activities shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays. b. Trucks and construction equipment shall be prohibited from using Zarthan Avenue between Cedar Lake Road and 16th Street and shall enter and exit the site from 16th Street and Park Place Boulevard only. c. During demolition of the existing building, the western wall of the building shall be left intact as a sound barrier for as long as practicable. d. Use of explosives shall be prohibited. e. All demolition and construction equipment shall utilize state of the art muffler systems. f. On-site crushing and recycling operations shall be located as far from existing residential land uses as practicable. 2. Approval of the Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development and Plat shall be subject to the following conditions as required in the EAW Resolution and subsequently modified on March 18, 1996 and by this resolution as follows: a. Installation of all roadway improvements associated with anticipated traffic from the proposed use and dedication of public right-of-way to accommodate public infrastructure. b. Adjustments to existing traffic lights, street lights and other utilities. c. Installation of sidewalks along the length of Cedar Lake Road, Park Place Boulevard, 16th Street, and Zarthan Avenue adjacent to the project and connecting to public plaza areas within the site. d. Dedication of drainage and utility easements to a depth of 10 feet back from planned right-of-way and execution of a sidewalks easement agreement. Such sidewalk easements shall extend 1 foot beyond required perimeter sidewalks. e. Installation of on-site directional signs to I-394 and Highway 100 to prevent unnecessary traffic in residential neighborhoods. f. Delivery and garbage service trucks shall be prohibited from using Zarthan Avenue between Cedar Lake Road and 16th Street and shall be limited to servicing the uses between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 8 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard and 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays. Unoccupied delivery and garbage trucks shall be prohibited from idling on site during nighttime hours as defined by Section 11-507(3)(a). g. Overnight parking of vehicles, semi-trailers, refrigeration units and the like shall be prohibited unless parked wholly within any of the enclosed loading dock bays. h. Openings of rooftop fans and air circulation equipment shall be required to face away from residential neighborhoods and all exhaust openings except bathroom fans shall be prohibited on exterior walls facing residential neighborhoods. In the event bathroom fan exhausts exceed the maximum nighttime allowable noise limits, operation of these fans shall be terminated until compliance with the City of St. Louis Park Noise Ordinance is achieved. i Compliance with ordinance provisions relating to exterior lighting and prevention of unnecessary nighttime site lighting. j. Compliance with all applicable City ordinance provisions shall be required unless modifications are specifically authorized by this Final Planned Unit Development approval or by more stringent requirements of the development agreement or supplemental development agreements. 3. The following modifications to ordinance requirements are authorized as part of this Final PUD approval: a. Bufferyards are not required between drive through facilities and adjacent properties that are part of the Final PUD. b. The temporary hoop structures associated with Home Depot’s “Garden Center” outdoor sales area are not required to be architecturally integrated with the principal building (utilize same building materials) provided masonry walls surrounding the outdoor sales area are provided as shown on the Approved Final Plans. c. A Bufferyard “D” may be substituted for the required Bufferyard “F” between the truck circulation and loading areas for the Retail/Service/Restaurant building on Lot 5 and Park Place Boulevard. d. Buildings are not required to utilize at least 60% brick or other natural stone on each building face but are approved with percentages of brick and other materials as shown on the Approved Final Plans. e. Buildings on Lots 2 and 3 may have more than 5% bright, pure accent colors on each facade and are approved with the percentages of accent colors shown on colored elevations “stamped” as received by the City on March 15, 1996 and on April 19, 1996 (Exhibits B2 and B3 of the Approved Final Plans). f. The area of all wall signs may exceed 7% of the building wall area but may not exceed the wall sign area shown on the Approved Final Plans. Exhibit A7 of the Approved Final Plans shall be revised to reduce cumulative wall signage by at least 37 square feet in accordance with the Preliminary PUD approval. g. Individual wall signs may exceed 150 square feet but may not exceed the individual wall sign areas shown on the Approved Final Plans. h. Two free standing “off-premise signs”, advertising uses on properties within the PUD only, are allowed as shown on the Approved Final Plans. Such signs are City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 9 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard denoted on the Approved Final Plans as “Center Pylon Signs” and also as “Monument Signs”. Such signs may also be referenced as “Project Identification Signs” or “Tenant Identification Signs”. i. The maximum size of the “Center Pylon Sign” faces may exceed 300 square feet and may be 320 square feet each as shown on the Approved Final Plans. j. The maximum total sign area of the “Center Pylon Signs” may exceed 400 square feet and may be 1,280 square feet as shown on the Approved Final Plans. k. One Monument Sign measuring no more than 4 feet 4 inches in height and 16 feet in width and identifying only the name of the Shopping Center may be placed in Outlot A as shown on the Approved Final Plans. Such sign shall include seating on one side, shall be faced primarily with brick, and shall not be counted toward the total approved sign areas. l. Exterior lighting spillover may exceed 1.0 footcandle at property lines that abut other properties within the Final PUD but may not exceed ordinance restrictions at property lines that abut properties that are not within the PUD. m. The Bufferyard “D”s separating the in-vehicle sales and service uses (drive- throughs) on Lots 4,5,6,7 and 8 of the Plat from 16th Street and Park Place Boulevard are not required to include a minimum of 95 plant units per 100 linear feet and may include a total of 225 fewer plant units than required as shown on the Approved Final Plans. n. Certain canopy trees may be installed at sizes less than 2-1/2” caliper as shown on the Approved Final Plans and such trees shall be given full plant unit credits. o. Certain evergreen trees may be installed at sizes less than 6 feet (height) as shown on the Approved Final Plans and such trees shall be given full plant unit credits. 4. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Approved Final Plans, which are incorporated herein as Exhibits P1, P2, S1, S2, C1, C2, C3, L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7 as revised by condition 3f of this resolution, A8, A9, F1, F2, F3, F4, F5, F6 (“Park Place Plaza” Monument Sign Detail), B1, B2 and B3, and the following conditions: a. MPCA approval of the remediation plan relating to environmental contamination on the site and conformance with the conditions of the approved remediation plan. b. Final PUD approval is contingent upon the developer and current/prospective property owners, including Home Depot, signing the required agreements and conforming with all provisions of the executed special assessment agreements for construction of required off-site improvements, executed development agreement and executed supplemental development agreements that cover all on-site improvements within the PUD in accordance with Section 14:6-7.5(F), executed sidewalk easements agreement, executed reciprocal easements and operation agreement, and the executed reversion agreement. Wherever there is a conflict between the requirements of any of said documents, City Code, and/or this resolution, the more stringent requirements shall apply. c. The type and colors of all exterior building materials (including building facades, canopies, screen walls, fences, trash enclosures, and permanent exterior signage) throughout the Final PUD must match those adopted as part of the Approved Final Plans, and no exterior building materials other than doors may be surface City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 10 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard painted (this requirement does not prohibit the use of standing seam metal with a baked enamel finish, as approved). Said doors shall be painted to match the approved brick or rock face block color. All exterior building materials must be maintained in an aesthetic manner as determined in the sole discretion of the City. d. Wherever brick is denoted on the Approved Final Plans, a full 4” thick face brick must be applied in a masonry technique except that an alternative brick application, face brick cast in structural panels, is specifically approved for the Home Depot building on Lot 2. The alternative brick application for Lot 2 must match the color, texture and visual aesthetics of the brick used throughout the remainder of the PUD. e. Permanent exterior signage is limited to that shown on the Approved Final Plans. Additional window signage, temporary banners and the like are restricted in accordance with the terms of the “Maintenance and Operational Restrictions” Exhibit of the development agreement and supplemental development agreements. f. All light poles must be included within curbed areas. g. All rooftop equipment must be screened from ground level view using parapet walls and all rooftop equipment must be painted to match the color of the rooftop to ensure that it is minimally visible from nearby office towers. h. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the developer must reimburse the City for all costs incurred by the City in connection with processing the applicant’s PUD, and preparation and implementation of the development agreements and associated agreements. i. In lieu of meeting certain bufferyard requirements as waived in Paragraph 3l above, the developer shall donate 225 plant units to the City in the form of twenty 2-1/2” canopy trees by June 1, 1997 for use on nearby lands to provide screening of the project. j. The subsequent phase of the PUD is approved in concept only as including 110,000 square feet of gross retail building area, 495 parking spaces and 55 proof of parking spaces on Lot 1. The details of the subsequent phase shall be reviewed as a minor amendment to the approved Final PUD, unless additional off-site impacts or modifications to Code or PUD requirements are anticipated, in which case, the details of the subsequent phase shall be reviewed as a major amendment. In either case, the City Council reserves the right to hold a public hearing regarding the subsequent phase. The subsequent phase shall require amendment to the development agreement and/or supplemental development agreement for Lot 1. k. No administrative subdivision of any property within the PUD shall be granted due to the interrelatedness of the PUD, plat, and Approved Final Plans. l. The developer and/or property owner shall dedicate, at no expense to the City, any right-of-way which may be necessary and required in the future to facilitate improvements at the intersection of 16th Street and Zarthan Avenue and/or to provide access from Cedar Lake Road into the PUD. Developer and/or property owner shall be responsible for the costs associated with these potential future improvements based upon the benefit to the project and/or the demands the City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 11 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard project has placed on the roadway system. Any such improvements would require a major amendment to the Approved Final Plans for the PUD m. The developer and/or owner shall obtain all necessary permits to complete any further required environmental remediation of the site and undertake said remediation pursuant to local, state and federal regulations, as applicable. n. The developer shall receive all other necessary permits and approvals from the City including, but not limited to sanitary sewer, water tapping permit, demolition permit, building permits, and erosion control permit. o. The developer shall obtain approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as well as any other approvals required by state and federal agencies, including the required Indirect Source Permit, and the developer shall comply with all conditions of said approvals and permits. p. The Final Plat shall be submitted to the County for recording prior to initiating any site work relating to construction of the PUD project; evidence of filing of the final plat or other assurances pertaining to required easements shall be presented to the City prior to issuance of any permits other than demolition and associated temporary noise permits. q. The Preliminary and Final Plat are inherent components of the Preliminary and Final PUD approvals and are subject to the conditions of Preliminary and Final PUD approval and the Approved Final Plans. Access to the platted properties shall be limited to the means provided in the Approved Final Plans. r. No certificate of occupancy for any building in the PUD shall be issued until all the circulation drives and internal sidewalks throughout the PUD and all the improvements, other than landscaping and wear coat of asphalt, for that building’s lot, have been installed and accepted by the City. All landscaping on the lot shall be completed within one (1) year from the date the certificate of occupancy is issued. s. The general public shall have the right to utilize the internal sidewalks for pedestrian access, including walking bicycles, through the PUD property and for access to the outdoor seating plaza, which shall remain available to the general public in perpetuity for passive recreational use that is not disruptive to the operation of the shopping center. No provision of the reciprocal easement and operations agreement shall be interpreted as overriding this requirement. t. The Approved Final Plan Exhibits may be revised to include a 4,450 square feet Arby’s restaurant on Lot 4 in accordance with the plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 1, 1996, and further revised as follows: to clarify building materials; to ensure that building materials match materials used throughout the remainder of the development; and to reduce the width of the metal door on the rear elevation to a maximum of 8 feet. u. The obligations and conditions herein imposed on the developer by this Final PUD shall also apply to any property owner, successor or assign. v. The City may enforce any provision of this resolution in the same manner as provided for a violation of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and/or as provided in the development agreement or supplemental development agreements. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 12 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard 5. The Final PUD shall be amended on October 22, 1996 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following condition: a. The height of the future Retail 1 tenant space at 5680 Cedar Lake Road may be reduced from 30’8” to not less than 20’0”. 6. The Final PUD shall be amended on January 6, 1997 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following condition: a. The rear door configuration in the tenant space on the south end of the 1650 Park Place Boulevard building (Bruegger’s Bagels) is revised in accordance with Exhibit A5.1 - Exterior Elevations dated 12-23-96 7. The Final PUD shall be amended on March 17, 1997 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a. The building at 1690 Park Place Boulevard (Arby’s) may utilize neon lighting in accordance with Exhibits A4.1, A4.2 and A4.3, Arby’s Exterior Elevations provided said exhibit and assent form are signed by Franchise Associates, Inc. b. The Landscape Plan may be revised in accordance with Exhibit L.1, Landscape Plan revised 2/28/97 and stamped received 3/3/97 provided the following conditions are met. i) A revised Grading Plan that accurately reflects the proposed retention of existing berms shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer and Zoning Administrator. The Zoning Administrator shall ensure that the plan meets requirements relating to minimum berm heights adjacent to truck circulation areas. ii) Prior to implementing the changes, Ryan Construction Company, Inc. and the current fee owner of 1625 Zarthan Avenue must sign the Assent form and revised exhibits. 8. The Final PUD shall be amended on January 5, 1998 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a. An Office-Max sign may be installed on the east facade of the building located at 5600 Cedar Lake Road (Office-Max) in the location shown on the Exhibit A3.1 Elevation. b. Prior to issuance of a sign permit, Ryan Construction Company, Inc. and Office Max must sign the Assent Form and revised exhibit. 9. The Final PUD shall be amended on April 3, 2000 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions, find no need for a new EAW, and add the following conditions: a. The Costco site (Lots 1 and 8) shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits, which shall be amended to address the following conditions: (Amended on July 15, 2002 by Condition 12.a.) i) The plans shall be amended as determined necessary by the Director of Public Works to show dedication of right-of-way near 16th/Zarthan as anticipated in the original development agreement sketch. Landscape plans shall be amended as necessary and approved by the Zoning City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 13 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard Administrator to accommodate future improvements to this intersection while preserving existing berming/screening to the extent feasible. ii) The plans shall be amended to include proof of parking in excess of minimum requirements as approved by the Zoning Administrator. If excess proof of parking is shown, details of the proposed curb cuts and effects on existing landscaping shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator. iii) Elevation drawings shall be amended to show screen wall heights of 12 feet as measured from the main service drive elevation unless evidence is approved by the Zoning Administrator that the proposed heights will adequately screen service vehicles. iv) Elevation drawings and sign details shall be amended to comply with ordinance requirements unless a variance for proposed signage has been approved. b. Prior to beginning any site work, the following conditions shall be met: i) A copy of the required Watershed District permit shall be submitted to the City. ii) An erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted and approved by Public Works. iii) A letter from the MPCA shall confirm no need for a new ISP based upon the final traffic study by SRF. iv) The official exhibits and assent form shall be signed by the applicant, owner, and City. c. Costco shall adhere to the restrictions on construction times and routes as included in the final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza except that additional restrictions may be imposed as necessary to prevent conflicts with customers during peak restaurant times. d. Costco shall adhere to restrictions on temporary signage as included in the Final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza. e. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional restrictions, the following conditions shall be met: i) The development agreement shall be amended and executed and shall address, at a minimum, land dedication, design, construction, financial sureties for on- and off-site improvements, and maintenance. ii) A revised light distribution plan, landscape irrigation plan, and all building material samples and colors shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator. f. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the following conditions shall be met: i) The required traffic improvements at 16th Street and the main access drive, including installation of a traffic signal paid for by the applicant, shall be complete and operational; the applicant shall also pay its share of a traffic signal at 16th and Zarthan, which may be installed at a later date. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 14 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard ii) The entire PUD site shall be found to be in compliance with the conditions of final PUD approval, or a Letter of Credit shall be submitted in the amount of 125% of the cost of any outstanding improvements, including but not limited to completion of improvements near the intersection of Park Place Boulevard and 16th Street, public transit improvements on 16th Street as approved by Metro Transit, and all conditions of the final PUD resolution and executed development agreement. g. Costco shall adhere to restrictions on delivery and garbage service hours and routes as included in the final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza except that additional restrictions on garbage service may be imposed on Costco as necessary to prevent conflicts with customers during peak restaurant hours. h. All sidewalks throughout the PUD site shall be maintained in a clear, walkable condition at all times during which one or more buildings within the PUD are open to the public. 10. The Final PUD shall be amended on November 6, 2000 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following condition: a. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued prior to the signal at 16th and the main access drive being operational provided Costco installs a stop sign at the exit to 16th Street and employs off-duty police officers to direct traffic from the date of opening until such time as the traffic signal is operational or the City agrees it is no longer necessary. 11. The final PUD shall be amended on August 20, 2001 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a. The Costco fueling facility site (Lot 9) shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits which shall be amended to address condition 11.f.iv. Previously approved official exhibits for Lots 1, 2 and 8 shall be amended to include traffic improvements noted in condition 11.g. b. Costco shall adhere to the Fire Department’s requirements for the fueling facility including: i) An employee must be available on-site while the fueling station is open. ii) A key-actuated manual reset switch shall be installed inside the attendant building. iii) A fire department access key box shall be installed on the exterior of the attendant building. iv) Instructions shall be provided in English and Spanish. v) Spill control equipment and supplies to contain and dispose of a 30-gallon (150% of customer limit) fuel spill. Include storm drain covers, absorbent materials, containers and tools. Protective clothing and equipment to be provided for trained attendants. vi) Dispensing nozzles shall be UL 842 listed. vii) One 40-B:C fire extinguisher shall be located outside the attendant building with a cabinet tamper switch to automatically activate emergency shut-off controls. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 15 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard c. Prior to beginning any site work, the following conditions shall be met: i) A copy of the required Watershed District permit or letter from the Watershed District indicating no need for a permit shall be submitted to the City. ii) An erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted and approved by Public Works. iii) The MPCA shall confirm that an ISP amendment is not necessary. d. Costco shall adhere to the restrictions on construction times and routes as included in the final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza except that additional restrictions may be imposed as necessary to prevent conflicts with customers during peak restaurant times. e. Costco shall adhere to restrictions on temporary signage as included in the Final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza. f. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional restrictions, the following conditions shall be met: i) The development agreement shall be amended and executed and shall address, at a minimum, design, construction, financial sureties for on-site improvements, including a letter of credit for 125% of the required internal traffic improvements, and maintenance. ii) A dimensional signage plan, landscape irrigation plan, and all building material samples and colors shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator. iii) All lights shall be completely recessed in the canopy. iv) Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Supervisor showing the curb locations around the gasoline storage tanks and the reduced landscaping island. g. Prior to issuance of a permanent Occupancy Permit for the Costco warehouse facility or temporary Occupancy permit for the fueling facility, the entire PUD site shall be found to be in compliance with the conditions of final PUD approval, the applicant shall implement traffic improvements recommended by SRF for the internal Costco warehouse intersection and eliminate three internal access points to Home Depot as shown on TD & A Layout 3, and shall change the sign at the 16th Street customer entrance to direct service vehicles to the 16th Street service drive. h. Service trucks shall use the service entrance on 16th Street and shall be prohibited from using Zarthan Avenue between Cedar Lake Road and 16th Street and shall be limited to servicing the fueling facility between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays and as recommended by the traffic study. i. Violation of any condition of PUD approval, including these amendments, shall result in a fine of $750 per day. 12. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 02-38-PUD) on July 15, 2002 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 16 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard a. The Costco warehouse building site (Lot 1) shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits, which shall be amended as approved by the Zoning Administrator to provide an accessible sidewalk and convenient stair location. (Amends Condition 9.a.). b. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional conditions, the following conditions shall be met: i) The official exhibits and assent form shall be signed by the applicant/owners. ii) The development agreement shall be amended if necessary, as determined by the City Attorney. iii) An additional letter of credit shall be submitted for 125% of the cost of the site improvements. iv) Building material samples and colors shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator. c. Costco shall adhere to the restrictions on construction times and routes as included in the final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza except that additional restrictions may be imposed as necessary to prevent conflicts with customers during peak restaurant times. d. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the liquor store addition, the applicant shall submit an electronic file and print and reproducible copy of the plat and as-built drawings for the PUD site. In the event that any signal arms are found to be on private property, appropriate easements shall be recorded against the private property. e. Violation of any condition of PUD approval, including these amendments, shall result in a fine of $750 per day. 13. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 04-70-PUD) on March 7, 2005 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a. The Home Depot garden center 5,764 square foot addition shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits. b. The following traffic improvements are shown on official exhibits and implemented: i. The 3-way stop intersection on the main drive aisle at the entrance of Costco is changed to a 4-way stop intersection. All stop signs at this intersection are changed to standard sized signs. ii. A new right-turn lane from the main drive aisle into Costco is constructed, and a new right turn lane (directing traffic north) is also constructed. iii. Stop signs at the eastern 4-way stop of the main drive aisle are changed to standard sized sign for better driver recognition. c. Landscaping shall be installed according to the submitted landscape plan, with additional tall grass plantings along the banks of storm pond #1. All materials must be approved by the City’s Environmental Coordinator. d. Bike racks in the area must be moved and/or replaced in another location on the Home Depot site. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 17 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard e. No outdoor storage is allowed; outdoor merchandise is allowed on sidewalk areas only, in accordance with the City’s Zoning Ordinance. f. Home Depot must repair or replace the sidewalk if damage occurs during construction of the garden center addition. g. All requirements of the City Engineer must be met. h. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional conditions, the following conditions shall be met: i) The official exhibits and assent form shall be signed by the applicant/owners. ii) The development agreement shall be amended if necessary, as determined by the City Attorney. iii) An additional letter of credit shall be submitted for 125% of the cost of the site improvements. 14. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 13-21-PUD) on June 17, 2013, to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a. Prior to the beginning of work, the following conditions shall be met: i) The official exhibits and assent form shall be signed by the applicant/owners. iii) The development agreement shall be amended if necessary, as determined by the City Attorney. iv) An additional letter of credit shall be submitted for 125% of the cost of the site improvements. v) An agreement assigning responsibility for maintenance of the sidewalk, including snow removal, to Costco shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by the City Attorney. vi) An agreement that guarantees parking access for Lot 2, Block 1, Park Place Plaza (Home Depot) to 59 parking spaces on Lot 1, Block 1, Park Place Plaza (Costco) shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by the City Attorney. The agreement shall be recorded with Hennepin County and proof of the recording submitted to the City. b. The Costco Warehouse and Home Depot parking lots shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits. 15. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 13-26-PUD) on July 15, 2013, to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a. Prior to the beginning of work, the following conditions shall be met: i) The official exhibits and assent form shall be signed by the applicant/owner. ii) An additional letter of credit shall be submitted for 125% of the cost of the site improvements. iii) All necessary permits, including but not limited to building, sign, and erosion and sediment control, shall be obtained. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 18 Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place Boulevard b. The Costco Warehouse fueling facility (Lot 9) shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits. c. 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 July 15, 2013 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk COSTCO WHOLESALEENLARGED CONCEPT SITE PLANS T . L O U I S P A R K , M I N N E S O T AJ U N E 0 5 , 2 0 1 35801 WEST 16TH STREETST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 5541698-2290-11JUNE 05, 2013DD12-01ENLARGEDCONCEPTSITE PLAN1110 112TH AVE. NE | SUITE 500BELLEVUE, WA | 98004MulvannyG2.comt 425.463.2000 | f 425.463.200205'10' 20'40'PROJECT DATASETBACKS:JURISDICTION:BOUNDARIESINFORMATION:20'CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MNST. LOUIS PARK, MN 554165801 WEST 16TH STREETZONING:PROJECT ADDRESS:CLIENT:COSTCO WHOLESALE999 LAKE DRIVEISSAQUAH, WA 98027C-2THIS PLAN HAS BEEN PREPAREDBY USING AN ALTA SURVEYPROVIDED BY WESTWOODPROFESSIONAL SERVICES, INC.DATED 1/04/02VICINITY MAP341 STALLS14 STALLS181 STALLS3.80 STALLS705 STALLS536 STALLSPARKING NEEDED TOMAINTAIN 5.0 / 1000 S.F.:9' WIDE STALLSHANDICAP STALLSNO. OF STALLS PER 1000 S.F.TOTAL PARKINGOF BUILDING AREA:PARKING PROVIDED:10' WIDE STALLSPARKING DATA (NO CHANGE):NOTES:EXISTING CONDITIONS TO BE FIELD VERIFIED.140,920 S.F.131,836 S.F.3,884 S.F.5,200 S.F.TOTAL EXIST. WAREHOUSEBUILDING DATA:BUILDING AREATIRE CENTERLIQUOR SALESEXISTING WAREHOUSE (NO CHANGE)173 S.F.2,816 S.F.CONTROLLER ENCLOSURE (EXIST.)CANOPY (EXIST.)FUEL FACILITY2,464 S.F.CANOPY EXPANSION5,280 S.F.TOTAL CANOPYST. LOUIS PARK, MN#377WAREHOUSESITE AREA:12.36 ACRES ( 538,461 S.F.)FUEL FACILITYSITE AREA: 1.42 ACRES ( 61,831 S.F.)City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place BoulevardPage 19 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1EAST ELEVATIONSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2SOUTH ELEVATION (NORTH SIM.)PLEASEPULL TOFORWARDPUMPPLEASEPULL TOFORWARDPUMPPLEASEPULL TOFORWARDPUMPSCALE: 1/2" = 1'-0"3CANOPY SIGN1212SCALE: 1-1/2" = 1'-0"4FLUSH MOUNTED COLUMN SIGN1111SCALE: 1-1/2" = 1'-0"5FLUSH MOUNTED COLUMN SIGN11111110 112TH AVE. NE | SUITE 500BELLEVUE, WA | 98004t 425.463.2000 | f 425.463.2002MulvannyG2.com© MulvannyG2 Architecture: All rights reserved.No part of this document may be reproduced in any form or by anymeans without permission in writing from MulvannyG2 Architecture.COSTCO WHOLESALECONCEPT ELEVATIONSS T . L O U I S P A R K , M N J U N E 0 5 , 2 0 1 35801 WEST 16th StST. LOUIS PARK, MN 5541698-2290-11JUNE 05, 2013CONCEPTELEVATIONSDD31-010 10' 20' 40'1" = 20'-0"ST. LOUIS PARK#377RUSSELL H. HAZZARD, ARCHITECTCity Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Title: Minor Amendment to PUD – 1700 Park Place BoulevardPage 20 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4f EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Use of Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund for Rehabilitation Project RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the use of the Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund (ERF) for the 3601/3 Rhode Island Avenue Rehabilitation Project. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to see this project proceed? SUMMARY: The Brownfield Gap Program (BFP) provides small grants to nonprofits for environmental assessment and clean-up of property in Hennepin County. The Brownfield Gap Program is funded with an Environmental Response Fund grant from the Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services. Projects are intended to benefit the community through green space, open space and natural areas, recreation, affordable housing, education, community centers, and neighborhood level economic development opportunities. Community Involvement Programs (CIP) applied for funding for five properties including 3601/3 Rhode Island Ave in St. Louis Park. All five properties, including 3601/3 Rhode Island Ave, are affordable supportive housing for those with serious and persistent mental illness (SPMI). CIP supports these residents in their homes so they can live independently in the community. Environmental testing was done and did not indicate the need for substantial abatement; however, test results did show that asbestos exceeds legal limits at four properties including 3601/3 Rhode Island Ave in St. Louis Park. A City Council resolution is required for the use of Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund grant for asbestos abatement. The scope of work for the CIP rehabilitation project at 3601/3 Rhode Island Avenue includes two kitchen remodels at $36,000 and two bathroom remodels at $17,000 for a total of approximately $53,000. The asbestos abatement work is in addition to this cost and, although minor in scope, it is necessary. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Marney Olson , Housing Programs Coordinator Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4f) Page 2 Title: Use of Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund for Rehabilitation Project RESOLUTION NO. 13-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING THE USE OF HENNEPIN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE FUND FOR 3601/3 RHODE ISLAND AVENUE REHABILITATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received an application for a rehabilitation project at 3601/3 Rhode Island Avenue submitted by Community Involvement Programs, Minneapolis NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota: that the City of St. Louis Park, MN approves the 3601/3 Rhode Island Avenue City W here Site is Located Project Name Rehabilitation Project , for which an application is being submitted on June 17, 2013 , by Date Community Involvement Programs, Minneapolis to the Minnesota Brownfield’s Brownfield Applicant Gap Financing Program funded with an Environmental Response Fund grant from Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 15, 2013 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4g FIRE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION MINUTES April 30, 2013 – 8:30 a.m. FIRE STATION 1 CONFERENCE ROOM 1) The meeting was called to order at 8:30 a.m. by President Lee. 2) In attendance were Commission President David Lee and Commissioners Bill MacMillan and Jim Rhodes. Also present were Ali Fosse, Human Resources Coordinator/Staff Liaison; Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief; Mark Windschitl and Cary Smith, Assistant Chiefs; Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager; and Tom Harmening, City Manager. 3) A motion was made by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner MacMillan, to approve the minutes of the April 10, 2013 meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 4) City Manager Tom Harmening addressed the Commission regarding the new Fire Chief vacancy. Mr. Harmening expressed great admiration for Chief Stemmer and commended him for the achievements made in the Department during his tenure, including stabilizing union/management relationships and overseeing the construction of two new fire stations. Mr. Harmening outlined the recruitment process he is recommending to fill the vacancy. He would like to use a third party recruitment firm to lead the process, including creating a position profile, advertising/marketing/soliciting candidates, reviewing applicants, scheduling and coordinating interviews, and onboarding assistance upon hire of a successful Chief. Commissioners discussed the process, indicating the importance of the position and the need to have balanced interview panels with challenging questions. Staff, union members, and Commissioners will be invited to participate in the process. The timeline for filling the position is approximately 4 months. A motion was made by Commissioner Rhodes, seconded by Commissioner MacMillan, to approve the Fire Chief Recruitment Process as recommended. Motion carried unanimously. 5) A motion was made by Commissioner MacMillan, seconded by Commissioner Rhodes to certify the next name on the Firefighter Eligibility Roster: Matt Sather. Motion carried unanimously. 6) The Commission adjourned at 8:56 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Ali Fosse City Staff Liaison to the Fire Civil Service Commission Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4h OFFICIAL MINUTES OF MAY 23, 2013 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a meeting on May 23, 2013 at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota – Council Chambers Members Present: Susan Bloyer, James Gainsley, Paul Roberts Members Absent: Henry Solmer Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Nancy Sells, Administrative Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL Chair Bloyer called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 25, 2013 Commissioner Gainsley made a motion to approve the minutes of April 25, 2013. The motion passed on a vote of 3-0. 3. CONSENT AGENDA 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Continued from April 25, 2013 Variance: Front and Side Yards Location: 4637 Excelsior Boulevard Applicant: Michael J. Jennings Case No.: 13-15-VAR Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He stated that the application was presented to the Board on April 25, 2013 with a request to build an addition with a 0.0 foot front yard and a 0.0 foot side yard abutting the street. Staff recommended denial of the application, but indicated it would support a variance to allow a 5.0 ft. front yard and a 5.0 foot side yard abutting the street. The applicant’s representative, Mr. William Thibault, requested the application be tabled so he could consider options with the applicant. The Board of Zoning Appeals tabled consideration of the application. Mr. Morrison explained that the applicant has agreed to proceed with a request for variances to allow a 5.0 foot front yard and a 5.0 foot side yard abutting the street. The applicant has submitted an addendum to the application. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4h) Page 2 Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes May 23, 2013 Mr. Morrison spoke about the importance of the visibility triangle at the intersection. He noted that the requested addition with the 5.0 foot front and side yard abutting the street preserves adequate visibility at the intersection. Mr. Morrison discussed purposes of setback requirements. Mr. Morrison stated that staff believes the request meets the criterion required for granting a variance and staff recommends adoption of a resolution approving a variance to allow a 5.0 foot front yard, a 5.0 foot side yard abutting the street and an encroachment into the visibility triangle for a building addition to the existing commercial building. Commissioner Gainsley said the request makes much more sense than the proposal presented in April. He said he sees no gaps in the request. Commissioner Roberts stated he had no questions for staff or the applicant. Chair Bloyer asked if the elevation plans are part of the approved exhibit. Mr. Morrison responded the elevation was offered as an example of what the construction would look like. He said typically the city tries to hold the elevations to the approval in the sense that they are one story, or basically the mass of it. Chair Bloyer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Roberts stated that all issues had been addressed. Chair Bloyer said she was a little uncomfortable without an official exhibit. Commissioner Gainsley moved approval of the resolution granting a variance to allow a 5.0 foot front yard, a 5.0 side yard abutting the street and an encroachment into the visibility triangle resulting from the 5.0 yards for property located at 4637 Excelsior Blvd. The motion passed on a vote of 3-0. Mr. Morrison read the statement regarding appeal to City Council. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 6. NEW BUSINESS 7. COMMUNICATIONS 8. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Administrative Secretary Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4i OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA JUNE 5, 2013 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Larry Shapiro MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison STAFF PRESENT: Ryan Kelley, Meg McMonigal, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of May 13, 2013 Commissioner Person moved approval of the minutes of May 13, 2013. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 2-0 (Robertson, Kramer abstained). 3. Public Hearings A. Wooddale Flats – Comprehensive Plan Amendment Location: 3998 Wooddale Ave. S. and 4017 Utica Ave. S. Applicant: Gatehouse Properties, Ltd. Case No.: 13-19-CP Ryan Kelley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He explained that the land use, although not anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan, provides a residential use in the neighborhood, while providing a transition between single family homes and commercial uses. David Carlson, Gatehouse Properties, Ltd. spoke about the proposed design for 6 townhome style buildings for a total of 34 units. He said they currently have 7 reservations. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. Bill McGuire, 3971 Wooddale Ave. said he lives across from the proposed condominiums. He said he felt the proposal was a very reasonable use of the land. He said the new residents will have a strong interest in protecting the neighborhood and seeing it prosper. He said he’d love to see the condominiums across the street from him. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4i) Page 2 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 5, 2013 Beth Kalpin, 4048 Toledo Ave. S., asked if there would be an opportunity to hear more about the traffic study, specifically regarding parking. She said Toledo is quite a busy street in terms of parking. Mr. Kelley responded that the site provides more parking than required. On-street parking is not anticipated. Chair Robertson spoke about the June 5th letter provided to Commissioners from Tasks Unlimited, 4029 Utica Ave. S., regarding their parking area which is currently only accessible by way of the church parking lot. He asked if Tasks Unlimited staff would be parking on the street if the development is approved. Mr. Kelley responded that the letter was received by staff just a few hours ago. He said staff had received in inquiry from Tasks Unlimited property owner about the easement and the project. Staff’s interpretation of the survey provided by Tasks Unlimited is that the easement is provided to the church property for that parking and drainage area. Staff has asked the developer and Tasks Unlimited owner to work out any issues that might be related to the easement. If the project went forward staff would make sure any issues related to that had been resolved. He said he couldn’t answer if that is all the parking Tasks Unlimited has and how that would work out. Karen Coggins, owns a building at 4045 Vernon Ave. S. She did not attend any of the neighborhood meetings. She asked how the traffic study was done. She spoke about an entrance at Utica coming out at Vernon, wondering about the traffic pattern. Would cars turn right onto Vernon, off of Wooddale or through the neighborhood back around Toledo or out to 41st & Wooddale to access getting in and out of the proposed complex. She said she asked because her building comes around to the sound wall. She said she never goes out that way because she can never get through the intersection. She said she leaves her property through an alley, which in the winter is nearly impossible to make a turn. In the past there has only been church traffic on Sundays and school traffic, so there have been limited times. With new residential there will be more people coming and going all the time. She said it is nearly impossible to get out of the neighborhood right now. Matt Pacyna, Traffic Engineer, SRF Consulting, said their traffic study determined that given it is a residential development they expect about 90% of the development traffic to come from and go to the north towards Excelsior Blvd. From a trip generation perspective about half the traffic would use each access point. They don’t expect the development to negatively impact what exists traffic-wise. The trip generation difference is negligible from a traffic operations perspective. There was a discussion about addressing existing traffic issues at Exc. Blvd. and Wooddale. Ms. Coggins spoke about the development of a lot of commercial access on Exc. Blvd. over the last 15 years. Ms. McMonigal stated that the conclusion of the traffic study is that there isn’t any increase over the existing church and school traffic when it was operating. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4i) Page 3 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 5, 2013 Chair Robertson said the traffic study had just been distributed to the Commission. Traffic is one of the detail issues that will get revisited as the project moves forward through the planning process. Harvey Meyer, 4044 Toledo Ave. S., asked for a copy of the traffic study. He said his property has a fence which separates his property from the proposed development. He said he was concerned about vegetation along the property line to insure privacy and minimize visibility to the development. He said the developer has assured him that his concerns will be addressed. He said as the proposal proceeds he would like to get assurances on that and assurances that it meets city approval. Dale Sopkowiak, 3985 Wooddale Ave., said traffic is a problem in the neighborhood but something is going to happen on the site and he thinks what is being proposed is the best situation and he strongly supports the development. He added that it should also beautify the area. Randy Manthey, 3979 Dakota Ave. S., stated that he is a resident of the Brooklawns neighborhood. He and his wife are longtime residents and are currently looking for this type of home that will be new, have low maintenance, close to the city, traditional architectural design, close to public transportation, walkability, energy efficient, strong neighborhood, and located in St. Louis Park. He added that Wooddale Flats is the kind of project that is in alignment with Vision St. Louis Park. Mary Beth Sinclair, 3908 Kipling Ave. S., said she has lived in the neighborhood for 12 years. She said she’s been looking for housing like Wooddale Flats for a couple of years. She said she supports the project and is one of the 7 people who have made reservations with the developer. Gloria Hiner, 4050 Wooddale, a 70-year resident, commented that there isn’t any medium density housing on the south side of Excelsior Blvd., it is primarily single family residential. Most of the dense residential is on the north side of Excelsior Blvd. She said she doesn’t favor the proposal because it sets a precedent for all of the south Exc. Blvd. to turn into dense housing. She said she would like to see the site remain civic use. Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Person stated the density being proposed is very reasonable. He said it will be an excellent addition to the city. Commissioner Kramer said he supports going ahead with the request but underscoring that traffic needs to be considered, and we ought to take this as an opportunity to fix it. He made a motion to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment for 3998 Wooddale Avenue and 4017 Utica Ave. S. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, including for the record, receipt of the letter from Tasks Unlimited regarding property access issue. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4i) Page 4 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 5, 2013 4. Other Business 5. Communications Ms. McMonigal mentioned upcoming open houses related to the SWLRT project. She said she would send Commissioners the open house announcements. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. STUDY SESSION 1. Plat for Auto Motion Carwash Gary Morrison presented the proposed preliminary and final plat of Auto Motion Carwash Addition. Staff is currently reviewing it for compliance to code and that it shows the required easements. No comments were received. The Preliminary/Final Plat is scheduled for a public hearing on June 19, 2013. 2. TCF Bank Proposal. Ryan Kelley reviewed the site plan for a proposed TCF Bank to be located at 8951 36th Street. The existing carwash would be removed and replaced with a retail building and a TCF Bank with drive-through. The retail building is shown in concept, and will be constructed at a future date unknown. Questions were asked about the shared parking with Gator properties. Kelley stated that the applicant was told of the private agreement and was advised to contact Gator. Gator will receive a notice of the application. The application for a CUP for drive-through is scheduled for June 19, 2013. 3. C1 and C2 Parking Study. Gary Morrison reviewed proposed changes to the zoning ordinance pertaining to parking uses. Changes include removing “Parking Business” and “Time Transfer Stations” land uses, and allowing parking lots as “Permitted with Conditions” in the residential districts. No recommendations were made by the Planning Commissioners. The ordinance is scheduled for a public hearing on June 19, 2013. The study session adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Submitted by Nancy Sells, Adm. Secretary Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Consent Agenda Item: 4j EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Vendor Claims RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing Vendor Claims for the period June 21, 2013 through July 5, 2013. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUMMARY: The Finance Department prepares this report on a monthly basis for Council’s review. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Vendor Claims Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 1Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 24.13STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEAAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT 24.13 37.33GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESACE SUPPLY CO 37.33 6,756.64TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEACS FIREHOUSE SOFTWARE 6,756.64 640.18REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESADVANCED FIRST AID INC 640.18 357.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESAE2S 357.00 68.50OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL 68.50 373.00REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC 373.00 947.50OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONSANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER 947.50 3,916.38INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESANDERSEN INC, EARL 3,916.38 53.67WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSANDERSON, JENNY 53.67 842.24GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYAPACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA 842.24 674.92GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESARAMARK UNIFORM CORP ACCTS 674.92 1,153.80FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICEATIR ELECTRIC CORPORATION 1,187.75MUNICIPAL BLDG OTHER 2,341.55 250.00PATROLTRAININGATOM 250.00 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 2 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 2Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 263.31GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEAUTOMOBILE SERVICE 263.31 1,319.82BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALSBACHMANS 1,319.82 361.92POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIESBARKER, BOB COMPANY 361.92 69,790.43PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBECKER ARENA PRODUCTS 69,790.43 12,041.24PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBOBS WOOD SPECIALTIES 12,041.24 2,518.00ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICESBOLTON & MENK INC 2,518.00 150.002010D FIRE STAT DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 150.00 6,014.68BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBRAD'S LANDSCAPING LLC 6,014.68 1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWBRYESEHOFF, CHAD 1,000.00 39.54POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESBUDGET SIGN & GRAPHICS 39.54 160.00GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEC&E AUTO UPHOLSTERY 160.00 12,501.00OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYCALGON CARBON CORP 12,501.00 143.81WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSESCANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY 143.81 408.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCARTER, JAMES 408.00 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 3 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 3Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 397.59IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE 397.59 165.33TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTCDW GOVERNMENT INC 165.33 4,422.59DISCOUNT LOAN PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT 11,982.81MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16,405.40 1,479.55FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY 1,479.55 5,625.57ENTERPRISE G & A HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN 5,625.57 198.31WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSCHEEK, DAVID 198.31 43.25FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESCINTAS CORPORATION 118.84FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 56.75REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 56.75AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 181.28VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 456.87 137.44-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK 19.74ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 178.33ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE 20.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING 314.53HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE 89.95COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 675.00IT G & A TRAINING 128.00IT G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1.33IT G & A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 46.00POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGE 38.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING 443.69GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 14.20POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 24.76POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 11.82POLICE G & A POSTAGE City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 4 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 4Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 98.00POLICE G & A TRAINING 69.38DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,692.90NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 267.56JAG GRANT 2010 TRAVEL/MEETINGS 366.58OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 320.87OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 741.84OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,110.00OPERATIONSTRAINING 109.00INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING 152.95-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 133.57ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 55.25ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 40.29ORGANIZED REC G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 25.00ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING 42.89VOLLEYBALLGENERAL SUPPLIES 102.79KICKBALLGENERAL SUPPLIES 175.65SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 9.65PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 126.54PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 23.27BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS GENERAL SUPPLIES 68.57BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 893.17WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 245.59REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 689.35ARENA MAINTENANCE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 51.21AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES 121.13AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,827.46LIFEGUARDINGGENERAL SUPPLIES 665.06POOL MONITORS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 581.59CONCESSIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 1,205.83CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIES 593.00SEASON PASSES GENERAL SUPPLIES 223.07VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 80.44VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 226.12TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES 22.79-GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 354.29GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1.58-CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 124.55TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 332.53TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 25.86CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT 15,510.44 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 5 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 5Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 11,950.00EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTCLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT INC 11,950.00 2,031.65CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIESCOCA-COLA BOTTLING CO 2,031.65 170.61IT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONSCOMCAST 170.61 515.94PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESCOMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY 515.94 725.31REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIESCONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP 725.31 13.18POLICE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESCUB FOODS 102.00POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES 52.34POLICE G & A TRAINING 167.52 744.56SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICECUES INC 744.56 270.50FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCUMMINS NPOWER LLC 270.50 612.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCURRAN-MOORE, KIM 612.00 88.70GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECUSTOM HOSE TECH INC 88.70 19,268.54SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES 8,605.12SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,803.72SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,876.72SSD #4 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,449.23SSD #6 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 44,003.33 200.30GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYDALCO ENTERPRISES INC 908.27REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,108.57 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 6 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 6Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,435.13PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYDEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES 1,435.13 795.50REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICEDJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC 795.50 21,472.00PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYDODGE OF BURNSVILLE 21,472.00 2,540.24POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC 2,540.24 110.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET UNREALIZED REVENUEDOLEMAN, MARIA 110.00 204.23WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESDON'S RODENTS 204.23 45.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSDOSTAL, SANDRA 45.00 93.79WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSEDINA REALTY TITLE 93.79 7,375.00ESCROWSEHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 7,375.00 22.00ENTERPRISE G & A TRAININGEISOLD, JASON 176.85ENTERPRISE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 198.85 2,310.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWELLIS, RUTH 2,310.00 53.70PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYEMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE 53.70 450.00ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAININGEMPLOYEE STRATEGIES INC 450.00 984.25PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT & SERV City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 7 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 7Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 984.25 36,567.70SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS RECYCLING SERVICEEUREKA RECYCLING 36,567.70 114.57WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSEXECUTIVE TITLE 114.57 359.14PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO 359.14 464.40REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICEFLOYD TOTAL SECURITY 464.40 570.64PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESG S DIRECT 570.64 585.00REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEGARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC 585.00 12.97WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSGINSBERG, DORIS 12.97 41.49WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSGOAD, ERIK 41.49 227.94GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESGRAINGER INC, WW 272.48GENERAL REPAIR OFFICE SUPPLIES 119.68GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 89.53WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS 709.63 448.56EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCEGROUP HEALTH INC - WORKSITE 448.56 2,600.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIHAMMER WOOD FLOORS LLC 2,600.00 1,843.78AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHAWKINS INC 6,038.42WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 7,882.20 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 8 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 8Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 158.95FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATHEINTZ, STEVEN 84.00FINANCE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 242.95 625.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENDERSON, TRACY 625.00 32.50ASSESSING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSHENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVI 32.50 3,175.50POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 3,175.50 869.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEHIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC 869.00 18.75WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSHOIGAARDS 18.75 11.03DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 44.86BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS SMALL TOOLS 67.89BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 123.78 3,526.92UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSHOPKINS AUTO BODY INC 3,526.92 177.97ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARHOPPE, MARK 177.97 200.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHORDYK, EVAN 200.00 50.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JEFFREY 331.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 381.50 200.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JENNIFER 75.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 275.00 200.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JESSICA City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 9 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 9Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 75.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 275.00 100.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, KRISTINE 50.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 280.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 430.50 1,587.60EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESI.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 1,587.60 2,487.00IT G & A TELEPHONEINTEGRA TELECOM 2,487.00 1,158.52POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESINTOXIMETERS INC 1,158.52 2,919.91GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEINVER GROVE FORD 2,919.91 310.16PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYI-STATE TRUCK CENTER 310.16 655.00DAILY ADMISSION ADVERTISINGIT'S TIME PUBLICATIONS LLC 655.00 9.60GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESJERRY'S HARDWARE 19.33SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 28.93 21.85WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSJOHNSON, MICHAEL 21.85 528.46EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSKELLER, JASMINE Z 528.46 270.00WESTWOOD VILLAS HIA LEGAL SERVICESKENNEDY & GRAVEN 270.00 360.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKIDCREATE STUDIO 360.00 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 10 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 10Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 65.00PICNIC SHELTERS RENT REVENUEKJAER, ANN 65.00 108.55WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSKOEHNEN, CHRISTOPHER 108.55 58.51INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICALKOHN ELECTRIC, HERB 58.51 12,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWKRAKER, TRAVIS 12,000.00 1,591.30GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEKREMER SERVICES LLC 1,591.30 255.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKUBES, JON 255.00 2,250.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESLAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES 2,250.00 605.00UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSLEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE 605.00 708.48EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONLEWIS, DON 708.48 1,549.45INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESLOEFFLER SHOES 50.00-PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,499.45 41,062.00IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESLOGIS 7,260.38TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 48,322.38 2,265.75EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT OTHERLUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC 2,265.75 162.50GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMASON, JARED 162.50 3,611.74TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTMASTER TECHNOLOGY GROUP City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 11 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 11Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 3,611.74 4,959.02MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIMAVO SYSTEMS 4,959.02 5,000.00HOUSING REHAB G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMAXFIELD RESEARCH INC 5,000.00 650.00POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENTMCCORMICK, RODNEY 650.00 70.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSMCFOA 70.00 121.61WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESMENARDS 3,564.55PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 3,686.16 1,252.70POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMETRO SALES INC 1,252.70 130.04WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSMEYERS, JAMISON 130.04 2,132.50WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMIDWEST TESTING LLC 2,132.50 580.50PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT 580.50 437.50PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESMPCA 437.50 2,310.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMRPA 2,310.00 193.53PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO) 678.26GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 22.53GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,709.98EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT OTHER 15,495.81EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 18,100.11 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 12 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 12Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 17,500.00POLICE & FIRE PENSION G&A POLICE EQUIPMENTNDI TECHNOLOGIES INC 17,500.00 1,205.55STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICENEENAH FOUNDREY 1,205.55 412.50GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESNELSON, JAME & ERIC 412.50 250.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESNELSON, KEITH 250.00 8,034.37CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENTNEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 8,034.37 150.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSNRPA 150.00 62.98ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT 50.95HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES 84.39FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 104.11POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 53.99PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 157.35COP SHOP OFFICE SUPPLIES 325.05INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 330.61PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 23.50PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 636.92ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 116.65PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 82.87WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 2,029.37 2,642.40INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESOFFICE TEAM 2,642.40 177.02PORTABLE TOILETS/FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESON SITE SANITATION 53.44SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 230.46 220.90EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESOPTUM HEALTH 220.90 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 13 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 13Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 74.17WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSOTTINGER, KATHERINE 74.17 28.43WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESPATRICK, MIKE 28.43 14.15WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSPEDERSEN, DAVID 14.15 965.66COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGPERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC 965.66 50,000.00PERSPECTIVESOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPERSPECTIVES INC. 50,000.00 27.80WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSPETERSON, KYLE 27.80 2,938.43ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPHILIP'S TREE CARE INC 2,938.43 88.18REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPIEHL, KEISHA 88.18 23.84WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSPLANTIKOW, LOIS 23.84 66.00GROUP ADMISSION PROGRAM REVENUEPLAYWORKS 66.00 1,917.25PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYPOMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 1,917.25 90.00PATROLLICENSESPOST BOARD 90.00 1,842.00SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESPPL ENTERPRISES, INC 1,842.00 34.27-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSPRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 532.69INVASIVE PLANT MGMT/RESTORATIO OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 14 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 14Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 73.99-STORM WATER UTILITY BAL SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 1,280.65STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,705.08 1,712.01UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSPREMIER FLEET SERVICES 1,712.01 645.00DIAL-A-RIDE PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPRISM EXPRESS MANAGER 645.00 131.25REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEPROFESSIONAL BEVERAGE SYSTEMS 131.25 99.63WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSPROVEN SOLUTIONS 99.63 9,899.25WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEQ3 CONTRACTING 523.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 10,422.25 3,380.54FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICERANDY'S SANITATION INC 2,637.64REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 988.00SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 7,006.18 230.00SEASON PASSES PROGRAM REVENUERAVKIN, DINA 230.00 48.95POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESREGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS LLC 48.95 1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWRESIDENTIAL RENOVATION LLC 1,000.00 47.00SEASON PASSES PROGRAM REVENUERIDER, COURTNEY 47.00 21,187.50PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIRINK-TEC ARENA SPECIALISTS 21,187.50 575.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRITCHIE, TAYLOR 575.00 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 15 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 15Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 114.37-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSS & S WORLDWIDE INC 1,777.93SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,663.56 12.58-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSSAFETY SIGNS 195.58SPECIAL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 183.00 200.00SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSAVERS RECYCLING INC 200.00 145.00INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDINGSCHAUER & SONS CONSTRUCTION 145.00 472.01GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHOEBEN'S WINDOW CLEANING SER 472.01 1,184.80FITNESS PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUESCHRAMM, HOLLY 1,184.80 11,977.04PE DESIGN GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESSEH 1,339.65PE DESIGN ENGINEERING SERVICES 13,316.69 29.83WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSELLCO INC 29.83 109.96WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSENTINEL FIELD SERVICES 109.96 26.04WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSENTINEL FIELD SERVICES INC 26.04 55.51WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSINN, CAROL 55.51 1,458.60EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESSLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 1,458.60 2,130.00GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICESONUS INTERIORS INC 2,130.00 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 16 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 16Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 10,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWSOUTH LAKE LLC 10,000.00 575.00OPERATIONSTRAININGSOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY TRAI 575.00 53.55WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSOUVIGNIER, CHARLES 53.55 17.39WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSPJ PROPERTIES 17.39 1,399.92IT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONSSPRINT 1,399.92 4,500.00ESCROWSGENERALSRF CONSULTING GROUP INC 2,689.99ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICES 483.68PE DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 7,673.67 2,668.67TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEST CROIX TREE SERVICE INC 2,668.67 72.86WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSTROM, MARY 72.86 758.54PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE 758.54 77.95ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS 77.95 156.85FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATSWANSON, BRIAN 156.85 62.00SUMMER GRADE 4-5 GENERAL SUPPLIESSWANSON, ROBERT 62.00 10.80POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESTARGET BANK 49.82HOME SCHOOL GENERAL SUPPLIES 60.62 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 17 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 17Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 225.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTEA2 225.00 82.56ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTELELANGUAGE INC 82.56 104.06BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICETERMINIX INT 104.06 2,978.86EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A LONG TERM DISABILITYTHE HARTFORD - PRIORITY ACCOUN 2,978.86 132.30SUPPORT SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTHOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT C 132.30 880.01ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL 880.01 1,540.59PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDITKDA 1,540.59 1,007.76ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICETOXALERT INTERNATIONAL 1,007.76 178.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAUTMANN, JOHN 178.50 103.07PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTRI STATE BOBCAT 103.07 5,227.45PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESTWIN CITY WINDOW REPLACEMENT C 5,227.45 480.94IT G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENTUHL CO INC 10,314.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 10,794.94 150.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSUNITED STATES TREASURY 150.00 234.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 18 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 18Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 234.00 180.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESUNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS 180.00 214.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTUS HEALTH WORKS MEDICAL GROUP 214.00 2.87-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSUSI EDUCATION & GOVERNMENT SAL 44.67ORGANIZED REC G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 41.80 36.37WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSVAREY, JASON 36.37 74.08COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONEVERIZON WIRELESS 50.13SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,897.63CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT 2,021.84 985.43GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESVIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR 332.63STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,318.06 721.93PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIWASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN 2,500.00-SOLID WASTE G&A MISC REVENUE 5,301.47SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS MOTOR FUELS 62,678.10SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 26,030.73SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE 35,202.06SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 23,933.49SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE 151,367.78 273.52WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEWATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC 273.52 55.90WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSWATERMARK TITLE AGENCY LLC 55.90 7,084.33CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIESWATSON CO INC 7,084.33 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 19 7/11/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:52:07R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 19Page -Council Check Summary 7/5/2013 -6/22/2013 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 66.64NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWESTWOOD HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD AS 66.64 131.85ERUTRAININGWILLIAMS, DALLAS 131.85 2,396.67GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESWRAP CITY GRAPHICS 2,396.67 4,831.35PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY 3,535.28SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 394.75STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 8,761.38 58.70-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSZEBEC OF NORTH AMERICA INC 912.58AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES 853.88 70.63WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARZEMBRYKI, MARK 70.63 68.25PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESZEP MFG 68.25 Report Totals 827,235.85 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 4j) Title: Vendor Claims Page 20 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Action Agenda Item: 8a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance amending Chapter 36 of the City Code pertaining to parking uses, and to set the second reading for August 5, 2013. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Should the City revise parking land uses in the zoning ordinance? SUMMARY: This ordinance is prompted by a concern that parking lots intended for use by customers and employees could instead be used to store vehicles for sale, repair or other purposes. An interim ordinance was approved by the Council, and became effective on February 14, 2013. The intent of the interim ordinance was to give city planning staff time to review various parking issues and practices in the commercial areas and to consider amendments to the zoning ordinance. The draft ordinance proposes the following: 1. Remove the “Parking Business” land use from the zoning ordinance. 2. Remove the “Time Transfer Station” land use from the zoning ordinance. 3. Establish “Parking Lots” as a permitted with conditions use in the multiple family residential districts. 4. Remove “Transit Stations” from the residential districts. 5. Miscellaneous amendments to clarify existing provisions and remove unnecessary language. Attached is a summary of the proposed changes to the zoning ordinance and a table showing all of the parking uses and the manner in which they are approved in each zoning district. NEXT STEPS: Conduct the second reading on August 5, 2013. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Existing/Proposed Parking Land Use Regulations Table Proposed Ordinance Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner Michelle Schnitker, Housing Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 2 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: This ordinance is prompted by concerns that some businesses could store vehicles for sale or repair in parking spaces required by the City for use by customers and employees. While the zoning ordinance is adequate for enforcing this violation, there are some changes that can be made to clarify the parking regulations. The following is a summary of the proposed clarifications. Remove the “Parking Business” land use from the zoning ordinance. Section 36-193(c)(29) allows “Parking Business” in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial district. “Parking Business” is undefined, and therefore, makes it difficult to require a vehicle to be removed from a parking lot since it could be argued that it is part of a “Parking Business”. Staff interprets the “Parking Business” to be similar to a park and fly typically located near the airport or a “pay to park” parking lot commonly found in Minneapolis and St. Paul. There are no businesses operating as a “Parking Business” in the City, and there is not a need for a “Parking Business” land use. Therefore staff is recommending that it be removed from the zoning ordinance. Miscellaneous amendments: The following is a summary of miscellaneous amendments intended to clarify existing regulations. Remove the “Time Transfer Station” land use from the zoning ordinance. The land use definition for “Time Transfer Station” is nearly identical to “Transit Stations”. Therefore, staff is proposing to remove “Time Transfer Station” from the ordinance since it is redundant. Time transfer station means a facility where passengers are transferred on, off, or between public transportation vehicles. This use is characterized by large volumes of bus and auto traffic at peak hours. Transit stations means loading, unloading and transferring of passengers on, off or between public transportation ground vehicles. Parking lots and parking ramps frequently are located in conjunction with the station. Establish “Parking Lots” as an accessory use in the multifamily residential districts. Parking Lots are currently not allowed in the R-4 and R-C Multiple Family Zoning Districts. Parking lots, however, are used as an accessory use to multiple family dwellings and other permitted uses. Therefore, they should be listed as an Accessory Use. Define “Off-street parking areas”. Off-street parking areas are allowed as an accessory use in the R-1, R-2 and R-3 zoning districts, but the land use is not defined. The ordinance proposes to define it as follows: Off-street parking areas means private off-street parking spaces for single family and two-family dwellings. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 3 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses Remove “Transit Stations” from the residential districts. Transit Stations are currently allowed in all residential zoning districts. A transit station is essentially a park and ride where the bus or other mode of mass transit enters onto the site for picking up or dropping off passengers. These sites tend to be large with a fair amount of traffic. Therefore, staff is proposing to remove them from the R-1, R-2 and R-3 zoning districts. They will remain as principal uses in the multiple family districts (R-4 and R-C). Miscellaneous amendments to clarify existing provisions and remove unnecessary language. There are many amendments that: 1. Remove “Reserved” references and renumber existing regulations. 2. Clarify existing language. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 26, 2013. One comment was received from the public. The Commission recommended approval of the ordinance on a 4-1 vote with the change noted below. A copy of the meeting minutes is attached. The Commission recommended one change to the ordinance. The draft it reviewed proposed to add parking lots as “permitted with conditions” in the R-1, R-2 and R-3 zoning districts. The Commission removed this from the ordinance, leaving the existing parking lots in these districts as legally non-conforming. The Commission expressed concern that allowing the parking lots in the R-1, R-2 and R-3 zoning districts would make it possible for a commercial property to buy houses, remove them and construct parking lots. The Commission concluded that this would be too disruptive to the residential neighborhoods. Staff agrees with this assessment. As legal non-conforming uses the existing parking lots can continue to be used as they are today. They cannot, however, expand in any manner. The Commission was satisfied with the legally non-conforming status of existing parking lots. The current draft of the ordinance includes the Commission’s recommendation; it does not include parking lots as “permitted with conditions” in any of the residential districts. Therefore, under the proposed ordinance, if a commercial property wants to purchase a residential property and convert it to a parking lot, the property owner would have to apply for a comprehensive plan amendment and zoning map amendment to a commercial zoning district. NEXT STEPS: Conduct the second reading on August 5, 2013. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 4 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses This table shows the following: How all parking land uses are reviewed and approved in each Zoning District. The changes resulting from the proposed ordinance. Underlined represents a change added to the ordinance. Strikeout represents a deletion from the existing ordinance. Parking Land Uses POS R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-C C-1 C-2 O B-P I-P I-G M-X Garages and other accessory buildings A A A A A Off-street parking areas A A A Parking lot A A A A A A A A A A Parking lot as principal use PC P PC PC PC Parking ramp A A A A A A A A Parking ramp as principal structure PC PC CUP PC PC Private garages and parking lots A A Transit stations PC PC PC P P PC P P P P P Transit stops/shelters A Time Transfer Stations PC P P Parking Business PC P = permitted PC = permitted with conditions CUP = permitted as conditional use PUD = permitted by PUD A = permitted as accessory use City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 5 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses ORDINANCE NO.____-13 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO PARKING AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS CLARIFICATIONS 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. 13-22-ZA). Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 36-142, 150, 161, 164, 165, 166, 167, 193, 194, 223, 233, 243, 244, 266, 361 are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language. Section breaks are represented by ***. DIVISION 2. LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS *** (f) Transportation uses. The following are typical of the transportation uses referred to in this chapter: *** (3) Off-street parking areas means private off-street parking spaces for single family and two- family dwellings. (34) Parking lots means surfaced and improved ground surface areas used for the parking of licensed and operable motor vehicles for periods of less than 24 hours. (45) Parking ramp means a structure built for the storage of licensed, operable motor vehicles for periods of less than 24 hours. Characteristics may include noise, exhaust fume odor, heavy traffic and large structure mass and footprint. (5) Time transfer station means a facility where passengers are transferred on, off, or between public transportation vehicles. This use is characterized by large volumes of bus and auto traffic at peak hours. (6) Transit stations means on-site loading, unloading and transferring of passengers on, off or between public transportation ground vehicles. Parking lots and parking ramps frequently are located in conjunction with the station. *** DIVISION 3. PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ZONING DISTRICT Sec. 36-150. Purpose of division. *** (e) Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in a POS district: *** (2) Parking Lot. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 6 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses *** Sec. 36-163. R-1 single-family residence district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-1 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated in section 36-162 and those specified for the use in this subsection. *** (9) Transit station. The facilities shall be limited to bus stops and associated parking lots and shall not include time transfer stations or other intense land uses. *** (e) Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in an R-1 district: (1) Garages and other accessory buildings in conformance with section 36-162. (2) Off-street parking areas in conformance with sections 36-162 and 36-361. *** Sec. 36-164. R-2 single-family residence district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-2 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated in section 36-162 and those specified for the use permitted in this subsection. *** (9) Transit station. The conditions for a transit station is that facilities shall be limited to bus stops and associated parking lots and shall not include time transfer stations or other intense land uses. *** (e) Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in an R-2 district: (1) Garages and other accessory buildings in conformance with section 36-162. (2) Off-street parking areas in conformance with sections 36-162 and 36-361. *** Sec. 36-165. R-3 two-family residence district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-3 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated in section 36-162 and those specified for the use in this subsection (c): *** (10) Transit station. The condition for a transit station is that facilities shall be limited to bus stops and associated parking lots and shall not include time transfer stations or other intense land uses. *** City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 7 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses (e) Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in an R-3 district: (1) Garages and other accessory buildings in conformance with section 36-162. (2) Off-street parking areas in conformance with sections 36-162 and 36-361. *** Sec. 36-166. R-4 multiple-family residence district. *** (f) Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in an R-4 district: (1) Private garages and parking lots spaces, provided they meet the requirements of sections 36-361 and 36-366. *** (13) Parking ramps provided that all of the following conditions are met: *** b. The minimum required yard for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of any parcel parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, shall be 50 feet. *** Sec. 36-167. R-C high-density multiple-family residence district. *** (f) Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in an R-C district: (1) Private garages and parking lots space, provided they meet the requirements of section 36- 361 and 36-366. *** Sec. 36-193. C-1 neighborhood commercial district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in a C-1 district may be used for one or more of the following uses. *** (3) Reserved. (4) Reserved. (53) Parks/recreation. The conditions are as follows: a. The principal structure shall be located a minimum of 50 feet from a lot in an R district. b. Areas designated for group activities shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from a lot in an R district. c. Swimming pools shall be located a minimum of 50 feet from any lot line and a minimum of 12 feet from any other structure on the same lot. d. Facilities which serve a community wide or regional function shall be located with primary vehicular access on a collector or arterial street. (64) Public service structures. The conditions are as follows: a. All exterior faces of all buildings shall meet the provisions of article V of this chapter. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 8 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses b. All structures shall be located a minimum of 15 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions and community centers. c. All service drives shall be paved. (75) Animal handling. The conditions are as follows: a. No animals or pens shall be kept outside the building or cause offensive odor or noise discernible at the property line of the lot on which the activity is conducted. b. Where animals are boarded, the facility shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. (86) Appliance, small engine and bicycle repair. Engines shall not be operated or tested outside of a structure if the use is located within 300 feet of any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. (9) Reserved. (10) Reserved. (11) (Repealed Ord. No. 2311, 1-27-06) (127) Food service. The conditions are as follows: a. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial roadway, or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local, residential streets. b. No building may be located within 25 feet of any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. (13) Reserved. (14) Reserved. (158) Printing process. The conditions are as follows: a. The floor area of the operation cannot exceed 5,000 square feet. (169) Private entertainment (indoor) without intoxicating liquor license. The conditions are as follows: a. The structure in which the use is conducted shall be located a minimum of 60 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential or has an occupied institutional building including but not limited to a school, religious institution or community center. b. If there is a wine and/or beer license, there shall be no separate bar area within the establishment. (1710) Restaurants without intoxicating liquor license. The conditions are as follows: a. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. b. Buildings shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential or has an occupied institutional building including but not limited to a school, religious institution or community center. c. If there is a wine and/or beer liquor license, there shall be no separate bar area within the restaurant. (18) Reserved. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 9 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses (1911) Service. The maximum floor area shall be 2,500 square feet. (2012) Studio. The conditions are as follows: a. No impact noise shall be audible from any property located in an R district. (2113) Communication towers that are 45 feet or less in height, subject to the provisions of Section 368 (Communication Towers and Antennas). (2214) Limited impact sexually-oriented business. The conditions are as follows: a. No owner, manager or employee shall allow any sexually-oriented materials or entertainment to be visible or perceivable in any manner, including aurally, at any time from outside of the business. b. The business owner, manager or employee shall assure that no person under the age of 18 years enters the separate area where sexually-oriented materials are provided. c. No owner, manager or employee shall allow any person under the age of 18 years to have access to any sexually-oriented materials, whether by sight, purchase, touch, or any other means. d. No owner, manager, or employee may sell or display for sale any sexually-oriented materials except in original unopened packages. e. No business may have a license under chapter 3 of this Code other than an off-sale license for nonintoxicating malt liquor. f. Both the owner of a sexually-oriented business and the manager of the business shall be responsible for the conduct of their employees and for compliance with this section. g. No owner or manager of a sexually-oriented business shall employ a person under the age of 18 years. h. No owner, manager or employee of a sexually-oriented business shall have been convicted of violating this section three or more times within 24 months. (2315) Residential/multifamily/cluster housing. The conditions are as follows: a. It is part of a commercial development permitted within the district. b. The building design and placement provide a desirable residential environment. c. Access to open space, plazas, and pedestrianways is provided. d. The housing is located above the ground floor. e. The minimum spacing between buildings is at least equal to the average heights of the buildings except where dwellings share common walls. f. The total number of units provided on an individual parcel does not exceed eight units. (2416) Libraries. The condition for libraries is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (2517) Museums. The condition for museums is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (2618) Police/fire stations. The condition for police/fire stations is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (27) Transit stations. The condition for transit stations is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (28) Parking business. The condition for parking business is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (2919) Parking lot. The condition for parking lot is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 The conditions are as follows: a. Vehicles shall not be parked on the parking lot from midnight to 5am. b. Vehicles shall be licensed and operable. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 10 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses c. Outside storage of materials, equipment or other items other than vehicles is not permitted. (3020) Medical/dental office. The condition for medical/dental office is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (3121) Funeral home. The condition for funeral home is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (3222) Banks. The condition for banks is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (3323) Business/trade schools/college. The condition for business/trade schools is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (3424) Office. The condition for office is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (3525) Retail. The condition for retail is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (3626) Large item retail. The condition for large item retail is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4. (3727) Shopping Centers. The condition for shopping centers is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4. *** Sec. 36-194. C-2 general commercial district. *** (b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the C-2 district. *** (15) Time transfer stations. (16) Transit stations. (1716) Large item retail under 20,000 square feet. *** (f) Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in any C-2 district: *** (2) Parking lots which comply with the requirements of section 36-361. (3) Parking ramps if all of the following conditions of subsection (c)(21) of this section are met.: a. The height of any parking ramp located within 200 feet of any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers may not penetrate the height of a line commencing at and perpendicular to said parcel line and extending upward away from said parcel at a slope of five horizontal feet for each vertical foot. b. The minimum yard requirement for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of a parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, shall be 50 feet. c. Access shall be from a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or otherwise located so that access can be provided without conducting significant traffic on local residential streets. d. If the parking ramp is located within 400 feet of any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, all light City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 11 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses sources on the top deck of a parking ramp shall be below the sight lines drawn from a point one foot above the light source to any point within said parcel ten feet lower than the maximum structure height of that use district at a distance of 400 feet from the wall of the parking ramp nearest to said parcel. *** Sec. 36-233. BP business park district. *** (d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in a BP district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with all standards of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 36, and shall only be permitted if findings are produced indicating that there are no adverse impacts upon the health, safety and welfare of the community. *** (4) Parking ramps. a. Parking ramps constructed as the principal use on a site shall meet the dimensional standards of this Section. b. Parking ramps shall meet or exceed the architectural design standards for principal buildings found in Section 36-366. ac. A minimum of 40% of the street level frontage of a parking ramp located adjacent to a street designated as a “Collector” or higher in the Comprehensive Plan shall be dedicated to non-parking uses. This requirement may be adjusted at the direction of the Planning Commission based on specific reasons related to site design. bd. Parking ramps shall be designed so that vehicles are not visible from the sidewalk and the only openings at street level are those to accommodate vehicle ingress and egress. ce. Snow removal areas shall not be located in the front yard or side yard abutting a street. *** (f) Accessory uses. Within any BP district, the following shall be permitted accessory uses, subject to any required conditions: *** (4) Parking ramps, subject to the following conditions: for parking ramps found in Section 36- 233 (d)(6). a. A minimum of 40% of the street level frontage of a parking ramp located adjacent to a street designated as a “Collector” or higher in the Comprehensive Plan shall be dedicated to non-parking uses. This requirement may be adjusted at the direction of the Planning Commission based on specific reasons related to site design. b. Parking ramps shall be designed so that vehicles are not visible from the sidewalk and the only openings at street level are those to accommodate vehicle ingress and egress. c. Snow removal areas shall not be located in the front yard or side yard abutting a street. (5) Parking lots. *** Sec. 36-243. I-P industrial park district. *** City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 12 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses (b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an I-P district. *** (9) Transit stations. (10) Time transfer stations. (11) Studios. *** Sec. 36-244. I-G general industrial district. *** (b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an I-G district. *** (12) Transit stations. (13) Time transfer stations. (14) Catering. (1514) Brewery. *** (e) Accessory uses. The following uses shall be permitted within any I-G district: *** (2) Off-street Pparking lots which comply with section 36-361. (3) Parking ramps, if they comply with all of the following conditions: of subsection (c)(13) of this section. a. The height of any parking ramp located within 200 feet of any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions and community centers, may not penetrate the height of a line commencing at and perpendicular to such parcel and extending upward away from such parcel at a slope of five horizontal feet for each vertical foot. b. The minimum yard requirement for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions and community centers, shall be 50 feet. c. Access shall be directly to a roadway identified as a collector or arterial in the comprehensive plan or otherwise located so that access can be provided without conducting significant traffic on local residential streets. d. Screening shall be provided along all property lines abutting an R district. The screening shall include a six foot berm where the parking ramp is above ground. e. If the parking ramp is located within 400 feet of any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, all light City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 13 Title: First Reading - Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Parking Uses sources on the top deck of a parking ramp shall be below the sight lines drawn from a point one foot above the light source to any point within such parcel ten feet lower than the maximum structure height of that use district at a distance of 400 feet from the wall of the parking ramp nearest to such parcel. *** DIVISION 9. M-X MIXED USE DISTRICT *** Sec. 36-266. Accessory uses. *** (3) Parking lots designed in accordance with section 36-361 except that the number of required spaces may be reduced as provided in subsection 36-266(6). (4) Parking ramps designed in accordance with the conditions contained in section 36- 194(c)(21) and utilizing the same exterior facing materials as the principal buildings. *** (6) Public transit stops/shelters. *** Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case File 13-22-ZA are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing June 26, 2013 First Reading July 15, 2013 Second Reading August 5, 2013 Date of Publication August 15, 2013 Date Ordinance takes effect August 30, 2013 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: July 15, 2013 Action Agenda Item: 8b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary/Final Plat of Auto Motion Carwash Addition, with conditions recommended by staff. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the proposed plat consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning and subdivision ordinance? SUMMARY: Requested is a combined preliminary and final plat to combine two properties into one. The subject properties are guided Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan, and zoned C-2 General Commercial. The proposed plat meets all City and County requirements. Approved development: The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) discussed below was already approved by the Council in 2011, and is not the subject of the plat application. The CUP discussion is background to the requested plat. The owner of the properties intends to add a carwash to the backside of the existing fuel station. To this end, the City Council approved a rezoning of the property from C-1 Neighborhood Commercial to C-2 in 2011. The rezoning was necessary because fuel stations, auto repair and car washes are not permitted in the C-1 district, but are permitted in the C-2 district by CUP. Along with the rezoning, the City Council also approved a CUP to allow the fuel station with auto repair and a carwash. The CUP was approved with several conditions, including the following two which must occur before January 1, 2014; otherwise the CUP will be void: 1. The properties must be combined by plat. 2. The building permit for the carwash must be issued. Construction must be completed within the time frame allowed by the building permit and City Code. The CUP also requires that the entire property be brought up to code for architectural standards, landscaping, outside storage, and car sales. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Aerial Photo Draft Resolution Planning Commission Minutes Preliminary/Final Plat Approved Development Plan (Elevations & Landscaping) Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner Michelle Schnitker, Housing Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 2 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: Location: Description of Request: Requested is a Preliminary and Final Plat to combine two properties into one lot to be described as Lot 1, Block 1 of Auto Motion Carwash Addition. Location: The subject properties are 3901 Excelsior Blvd (former Mobile gas station) and 3921 Excelsior Blvd (parking lot located to the west of 3901 Excelsior Blvd). These properties are located at the southwest corner of Excelsior Boulevard and France Avenue. Background: The gas station property is part of Block 15 Mendoza Park, and includes a previously vacated right-of-way. The parking lot property is unplatted. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 3 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) Plat Analysis: If approved, the plat will combine the two existing properties into one lot to be described as Lot 1, Block 1 Auto Motion Carwash Addition. Property Size: Property Size (square feet) Lot 1 27,829 Right-of-Way 30,023 Total 57,852 Right-of-Way: Approximately 30,023 square feet of the property is encumbered by easements dedicated to the County for Excelsior Blvd and France Ave roadway and sidewalk purposes. These easements remain unchanged, and will continue to be in effect. Utility Easements: There are existing storm sewer and sanitary sewer utilities that run east/west across the property. Easements were recorded in 2011. The City Engineer has confirmed that these easements are correctly shown on the proposed plat. Landscaping Easements: Existing landscaping easements are included on the plat. The easements are required to preserve landscaping along Excelsior Boulevard installed as part of the Excelsior Boulevard streetscape. The easement at the corner includes the St. Louis Park monument sign. Sidewalks: Sidewalks exist along Excelsior Boulevard and France Avenue. Therefore no additional sidewalks are required. Park Dedication: The City collects park dedications for subdivisions. Since this is a combination, not a subdivision, park dedication is not required. Development Proposal: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) was approved by the City in 2011 to remodel the existing gas station, add a carwash and bring the property into compliance with landscaping and architectural requirements. All site and performance requirements typically required by the plat and development were satisfied by the CUP. Plat Required: The proposed carwash will be attached to the existing building, but located on the parking lot parcel to the southwest of the gas station. Therefore, the two parcels have to be combined before construction can begin. A copy of the development plan is attached. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 4 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW: A public hearing was conducted at the Planning Commission on June 26, 2013. No comments were received. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary/final plat (5-0 vote). Minutes are attached. Recommendation: Approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat of Auto Motion Carwash Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Final Plat will become void if not recorded at the County within six months of City Council approval. Applicant shall submit proof of recording the Final Plat to the City. 2. $5,000 security deposit is submitted to the City to ensure the following are completed: a. A signed mylar copy of the plat is submitted to the City. b. Iron monuments are installed marking the lot corners. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 5 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) Aerial Photo City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 6 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) RESOLUTION NO. 13-____ RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF AUTO MOTION CARWASH ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Alberto Properties, LLP, owner and subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as Auto Motion Carwash Addition have submitted an application for approval of preliminary and final plat of said subdivision in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder. 2. The proposed preliminary and final plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park. 3. The proposed plat is situated upon the following described lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit: All that part of Northeast Quarter of Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24 described as follows to-wit; Commencing at the point of intersection of the center line of Excelsior Road with the centerline of France Avenue as said Road and Avenue are located and shown on the plat of MENDOZA PARK, thence running Southwesterly along said center line of said Excelsior Road to a point made by intersection of said center line of said Road and center line of Evergreen Avenue (said center line of said Evergreen Avenue shall be a line parallel with the Southwesterly line of Block 15, MENDOZA PARK and 40 feet Southerly, measured at right angles from Southwesterly line of said Block 15), extended Northwesterly to make said intersection with the center line of said Excelsior Road; thence running Southeasterly along said center line of said Evergreen Avenue until it intersects the center line of France Avenue; thence Northerly along the center line of France Avenue to the point of commencement. And That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24 described as follows: Commencing at a point made by the intersection of center line of Excelsior Road and the center line of Evergreen Avenue (said center line of said Evergreen Avenue shall be a line parallel with the Southwesterly line of Block 15, MENDOZA PARK and 40 feet Southerly, measured at right angles from the Southwesterly line of said Block 15) extended Westerly to make said intersection with the center line of said Excelsior Road, thence running Southeasterly along said center line said Evergreen Avenue until it intersects the center line of France Avenue; thence Southerly along the center line of France Avenue to a point made by the intersection of said center line of France Avenue with a line perpendicular to the center line of Excelsior Road and City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 7 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) intersecting said center line of Excelsior Road at a point 315.5 feet Southwesterly from the point of intersection of said center line of Excelsior Road with the East line of said Section 6; thence Northwesterly to a point in the center line of Excelsior Road 315.5 feet Southwesterly from the intersection of said centerline of said Excelsior Road with the East line of said Section 6; thence Northeasterly along the center line of said Excelsior Road to the point of beginning. And That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, described as beginning at a point on the center line of Excelsior Boulevard, formerly Excelsior Road, distant 315.5 feet Southwesterly from the point of intersection of said centerline with the East line of said Section 6; thence South 4140’58” West along said center line a distance of 52.90 feet; thence 4819’02” East a distance of 223.10 feet; thence South 8249’24” east a distance of 47.97 feet; thence South 8953’47” East a distance of 30.00 feet to the center line of France Avenue; thence north 006’13” East along said center line a distance of 7.78 feet to the intersection with a line drawn perpendicular to the center line of Excelsior Boulevard through the point of beginning; thence northwesterly to the point of beginning. Conclusion The proposed preliminary and final plat of Auto Motion Carwash Addition is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk subject to the following conditions: 1. The Final Plat will become void if not recorded at the County within six months of City Council approval. 2. $5,000 security deposit is submitted to the City to ensure the following are completed: a. A signed mylar copy of the plat is submitted to the City. b. Iron monuments are installed marking the lot corners. 3. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 4. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein. 5. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth above and the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code have been fulfilled. 6. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section 26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 8 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 15, 2013 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 9 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) EXCERPT OF UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA June 26, 2013 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris, Richard Person MEMBERS ABSENT: Carl Robertson, Larry Shapiro STAFF PRESENT: Gary Morrison, Sean Walther, Nancy Sells 1. Call to Order – Roll Call Vice-Chair Morris called the meeting to order. 3. Public Hearings A. Preliminary and Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition Location: 3901 & 3921 Excelsior Blvd. Applicant: Alberto Properties, LLP Case No.: 13-23-S Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He explained that the purpose of the requested plat is to dedicate the right-of-way and to combine the two properties into one. In 2011 the property owner was granted a conditional use permit to remodel the existing gas station, add a carwash and bring the property into compliance with landscaping and architectural requirements. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said her concern is that developers have indicated interest in that property and the two houses going south, and the businesses from that point to Glenhurst. She asked if the current plat request makes it easier to apply for a redevelopment for that whole area? Mr. Morrison said that the plat itself doesn’t have an impact on the ability to assemble properties. He added that both properties were rezoned C-2 in 2011. Vice-Chair Morris asked about dedication of right-of-way. Mr. Morrison said the easements already exist and the County has said it doesn’t need any additional land other than what it already controls there. Vice-Chair Morris opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, he closed the public hearing. Commissioner Carper noted that the request has come to the Commission previously through a study session and the CUP process. He said the request seems to be a simple action to combine two properties. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 10 Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.) Commissioner Carper made a motion to recommend approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat of Auto Motion Carwash Addition. Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0. Adrianne Lebow, 3540 and 3544 France Ave. S., said she had been unable to attend previous meetings about the property and she didn’t have any information about the proposal. Commissioner Morris said staff could meet with her to answer any questions about the proposal. He added that final approval needs to be made by the City Council. City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)Page 11 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)Page 12 CUP Exhibits Proposed Building Elevations City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)Page 13 City Council Meeting of July 15, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)Page 14