HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013/08/19 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular
AGENDA
AUGUST 19, 2013
6:30 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers
Discussion Items
1. 6:30 p.m. 2014 Budget Discussion
2. 7:15 p.m. Mayor, City Council and Economic Development Authority Compensation
7:25 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes August 5, 2013
4. Approval of Agenda
5. Reports
5a. EDA Vendor Claims
6. Old Business -- None
7. New Business
7a. Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty Limited
Partnership and Dolce Living Investments, LLC
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Assignment and
Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty Limited Partnership and
Dolce Living Investments, LLC related to The West End project.
8. Communications -- None
9. Adjournment
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Book Presentation by Dr. Robert Ramsey
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Special City Council Meeting Minutes July 8, 2013
3b. Study Session Meeting Minutes July 22 , 2013
3c. Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes July 29, 2013
3d. City Council Meeting Minutes August 5, 2013
Meeting of August 19, 2013
City Council Agenda
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. Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution Declaring Results of the
Municipal Primary Election held August 13, 2013.
8b. Resolution Confirming Appointment of Debra Heiser to the Position of Engineering
Director
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution confirming the appointment of
Debra Heiser to the position of Engineering Director.
8c. First Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Pertaining to Repair of Leaking Water
Service Lines
Recommended Action: Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance amending
Chapter 32, Sec. 32-202 of the St. Louis Park City Code pertaining to the Repair of
Leaks, and to set the second reading for September 3, 2013.
8d. Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project
Regarding Restaurants
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Major Amendment to
the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project.
8e. 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 August 19, 2013
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Accept donation of a spinning outdoor play structure to the City of St. Louis Park and
the St. Louis Park School District in memory of Haysem Sani and Mohamed Fofana
from St. Croix Recreation Company and installer, Contracting Solutions, Inc.
4b. Accept monetary donations from Tom Grimsrud in memory of Jane Grinsrud in the
amount of $30 for the purchase of plants or shrubs at Westwood Hills Nature Center
and a donation from Groves Academy in the amount of $32 for programming at
Westwood Hills Nature Center
4c. Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $42,950.00 and
accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 23 (Mechanical) for
Project No. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002, City Contract No. 76-11
4d. Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $7,567.60 and accepting
work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 10 (Hollow Metal Frames, Doors
and Finish Hardware) for Project No. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002, City Contract No.
41-11
4e. Adopt Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for St. Louis Park
School District #283 (ISD 283) for an addition to Peter Hobart Elementary, with
conditions as recommended by staff
4f. Adopt Resolution approving the Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment
Contract between Duke Realty Limited Partnership and Dolce Living Investments,
LLC related to The West End project
4g. Approve for filing Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes April 17, 2013
4h. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 26, 2013
4i. 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: August 19, 2013
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2014 Budget Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. This report is to assist with the
Study Session discussion regarding 2014 Budget recommendations and to provide information
for setting the 2014 Preliminary Property Tax Levies on September 3, 2013.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
• Is there other information that Council would like to review?
• Are there any other service delivery changes Council would like to have considered?
• Does the City Council have questions regarding the 2014 budget recommendations prior
to setting the preliminary levies and/or are there other items to discuss, add or change?
• Does the 2014 budget process and timeline meet Council expectations?
• What does the City Council desire to certify as a preliminary levy on September 3, 2013?
Staff recommends certifying a 3.50% levy change from 2013 to 2014 Preliminary
Property Tax Levy.
• Does the City Council desire to certify the maximum HRA levy amount as allowed by
law, and as recommended by staff, which would be a 5.38% increase from the 2013 levy?
• Is the City Council comfortable with the proposed utility rate adjustment plans?
SUMMARY: Included is information pertaining to the 2014 Budget and 2014 Preliminary
General Property Tax and HRA levies. Staff is currently working on preparing budgets for 2014,
though included in the report are some items of significance that are being considered. In
addition, staff would like direction, if needed, on any major changes, programs, or policy
considerations that should be considered during the preparation of the 2014 budget. Finally,
there is a brief discussion on utility rates and some changes to them based on Council direction
regarding encouraging the community via recycling and organics to reduce waste.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Information regarding the budget, tax
levies and utility rates are provided in this report.
VISION CONSIDERATION: All vision areas are taken into consideration and are an
important part of our budgeting process. St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and
engaged community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
2014 Proposed Utility Rates Impact
2014 Budget Calendar
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Steve Heintz, Finance Supervisor
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: 2014 Budget Discussion
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
On June 24, 2013, staff met with the City Council to discuss the 2014 Budget process. Council
agreed that staff should follow recommendations from the “2014 Budget Guiding Principles”
when preparing the 2014 Budget. Assumptions for the 2014 Budget included a pattern similar to
past years; a levy increase, modest increase in other fees and charges where appropriate to fit
with business costs, maintain high quality and responsive service delivery, hold expenditures flat
if possible with adjustments for some modest growth based on essential business needs, funding
for a wage and benefit contribution increase, utility rate increases, and continued long range
financial planning.
Based on budget assumptions, debt service obligations, and information from the CIP and
LRFMP, staff anticipated a 2014 proposed preliminary levy limit increase of approximately
1.14%, or $282,558 back on June 24th based on information provided by the State of Minnesota
on proposed levy limits.
Updated levy information: Staff has worked with League of MN Cities along with other finance
professionals and MN Department of Revenue staff on some clarifying information since
meeting with Council on June 24th. Based on these discussions, the City’s current proposed
preliminary levy limit under the law represents an approximate 5.76% increase, or $1,422,477,
from the 2013 levy. This significant change pertains to the special levies section of levy limits,
how they are used in calculating the 2012 or 2013 Net Levy Limit and how those are applied in
determining the 2014 levy limit. As a result of this clarifying information, many cities will likely
have a much more liberal levy limit. Staff will provide more information on this at the study
session.
Discussion Topics – Monday, August 19th:
The purpose of the study session discussion is to make sure service delivery and business needs
are congruent with Council expectations in preparing the 2014 Budget. For 2014, as in the past,
budget guiding principles, as well as Vision and Mission, are in the forefront of budgeting
recommendations. The study session discussion is intended to be at the higher level to allow
Council to provide levy direction to staff as well as other initiatives they would like staff to add
or explore. Based upon this discussion, staff can then prepare more information to bring back to
the City Council if needed. Department Directors, or their designee, are here this evening to
answer questions from the City Council relating to the 2014 Budget. Below is the suggested
order of the budget presentation and discussion for the Study Session:
1. Discussion on overall staff recommendations.
2. 2014 Preliminary Property Tax Levy discussion for adoption on September 3, 2013.
3. 2014 Preliminary HRA Levy discussion for adoption on September 3, 2013.
4. 2014 Utility Rates.
5. Council questions, comments, expectations, and data requests for upcoming meetings,
including the budget calendar.
Special Study Session Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: 2014 Budget Discussion
The 2014 Preliminary Budget Items of Significance:
Legislative directives:
• Levy limits are in place for one year, and based on information from, and conversations
with both the State of Minnesota and League of MN Cities, the City’s 2014 levy limit is
approximately a 5.76% increase, or $1,422,477 more when compared to the 2013 Final
Levy. This levy limit determination will not be received by the City until September 1st;
therefore, if the information differs significantly, the Council will have the opportunity to
amend the 2014 Preliminary Property Tax resolution on September 3rd, or be provided
more information on September 3rd or at a Special City Council meeting on September
9th, and then at that meeting adopt a preliminary levy.
• Local government aid has been approved to be issued in accordance with a formula set by
the state. Currently the City is scheduled to receive $458,830 in 2014 and 2015.
Personnel Costs: Funds for staffing are the largest expenditure of the City’s operating budget.
In building the 2014 budget recommendations, a wage adjustment of 2% is being used as an
assumption.
As a reminder, all 5 union contracts are open for negotiation for 2014. Required statutory
changes to Police and Fire PERA contributions, to help bring more stability to those funds, will
be incorporated into the 2014 budget and are as follows: The employee current contribution of
9.6% of salary will increase to 10.2% in 2014, and the employer current contribution of 14.4% of
salary will increase to 15.3% in 2014.
The City is continuing to work with employees in the area of wellness to increase education and
over the long term, encourage healthier lifestyle choices to help with claims. As such, a wellness
benefit increase of $5, from $35 to $40 per month per employee for those that participate in the
program was approved in 2013 for 2014.
The City will be accepting proposals for health insurance this fall for coverage starting January
1, 2014. Currently, the City has HealthPartners as its provider and employees have been pleased
with this product and services to date. However, due to the employee claim experience,
increases between 25 – 30% may occur. If the City’s renewal was earlier in the year, claim data
shows the City would have experienced up to a 46% increase in renewal rates. Continued work
with the City’s benefits consultant and benefits committee to look at where the City’s experience
ratios are the highest and how to mitigate them is on-going, but does take several years of lower
claims ratios to have an impact on rates. For 2014, a general employer benefit contribution
increase of $100 per month is also included in the budget projections. The total impact of these
proposed increases discussed above for the General Fund is approximately $555,000. Finally,
the City is also reviewing information on health care reform as it becomes available and will be
incorporating any anticipated budget impact into the 2014 and 2015 Budgets.
Summary of other 2014 general budget recommendations with comments
• The League of MN Insurance Trust is now using a new set of formulas for determining
property and liability insurance coverage. Based upon this, cities with police, fire
departments and significant capital projects among other things may experience increased
costs. This information will not be available until the 4th quarter of this year as to what
the city’s costs may be for insurance, but have been given an estimate guideline of up to a
30% increase, which probably isn’t very likely though. Currently, a projected General
Fund increase of approximately $43,500 has been proposed for the 2014 Budget.
Special Study Session Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: 2014 Budget Discussion
• For 2014, Administrative Services anticipates increased revenue for two additional liquor
licenses and increase cost for election judges due to election for governor.
• Interns: three departments are recommending interns to be hired for one year to handle
various business needs along with providing learning opportunities.
• With changes in Engineering staffing, it is anticipated funding will be needed for
professional services for capital project delivery.
• Postage costs are increasing for 2014 and it is recommended $12,000 in additional
funding will be needed to cover potential increased cost.
• It is anticipated the building permit revenue will increase approximately $57,000 in 2014
compared to 2013.
• Park programs anticipate an increase for warming house help, office assistance and edible
gardens program expansion. An increase of $30,000 for the Emerald Ash Borer
Preparedness Plan.
Cable TV Fund – Reduction of the transfer from Cable TV to the General Fund by $25,000 in
2014. The reduction will help improve the long-term sustainability of the Cable TV Fund.
Franchise Fees - No changes recommended or planned this year. It is anticipated this will be
explored during 2014 in preparation of 2015 budget, which is consistent with adjusting these fees
every other year based on financial analysis.
Fees, Charges and Other Revenues - Staff will continue to review current fee data based on
cost analyses and complete a review of comparable cities before making recommendations for
the 2014 Fee Schedules. These recommendations will be provided to Council in upcoming months.
C.I.P. (Capital Improvement Plan) - Staff has completed preliminary work on the CIP, and
currently are conducting a second round of review or updates. Staff will be further reviewing
this plan and will bring it back to Council as the budget process progresses.
2014 Preliminary Property Tax Levy
In working to develop a 2014 Preliminary Property Tax Levy for the City Council to consider,
there are some important key items to keep in mind:
• Levy limits for 2014
• Funding challenges in several funds impacting long-term sustainability
• As in past years, the 2014 Preliminary Property Tax Levy adopted by the City Council on
September 3, 2013, can be decreased, but cannot be increased after that date.
2013 Final Levy and 2014 Preliminary Levy
A synopsis of prior year levy information and the 2014 Proposed Preliminary Levy is shown below:
1. The 2013 Final Levy was $24,712,941, which was 4.00% or $950,190 more than 2012.
2. The 2014 Preliminary Property Tax Levy range staff recommends is proposed at
$25,577,908, which is approximately 3.50% or $864,967 increase than the 2013 Final
Levy.
Special Study Session Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: 2014 Budget Discussion
Fiscal Disparities
At this time, the City has not received its fiscal disparities information, which is consistent with
previous years. Staff has been in contact with Hennepin County and as soon as figures are
available, staff can prepare estimates on what the changes to property taxes will look like.
HRA Levy
This levy was originally implemented in St. Louis Park due to legislative changes in 2001 which
significantly reduced future tax increment revenues. The City Council elected at that time to use
the levy proceeds for future infrastructure improvements in redevelopment areas. Thus far, some
of the HRA Levy proceeds have been used to fund infrastructure studies, analyses for future
improvement projects and are currently beginning to pay for the City’s share of Highway 7 and
Louisiana. By law these funds could also be used for other housing and redevelopment purposes.
Given the significant infrastructure needs facing the City in the future, particularly transportation
infrastructure needs, staff recommends that at this point in time the HRA Levy continue at the
maximum allowed by law for the 2014 budget year, which is consistent with the City’s Long
Range Financial Management Plan. The HRA Levy cannot exceed 0.0185% of the taxable
market value of the City. Therefore, Staff has calculated the maximum HRA Levy for 2014 to
be $949,359 based on data from Hennepin County which is a $48,426 increase or approximately
5.38% from the 2013 HRA Levy of $900,933.
Utility Funds
• Water: The City is in the fourth year of the ten year plan for increasing the fixed rate
charges to reduce volatility in the fund due to seasonality usage fluctuations. As in past
years, rates are analyzed and adjusted as needed to maintain long term sustainability and
fund balance. Staff recommends continuing on the 10 year plan.
• Sewer: Rates are fairly stable for this area. Sewer costs are mainly to support the
Metropolitan Council of Environmental Services (MCES), capital and personnel costs.
• Storm Water: With more emphasis being placed on this fund per Council direction,
increasing regulations, and more capital projects being considered, rates will need to be
adjusted fairly significantly over the next several years to accommodate the investment in
the fund.
• Garbage/Recycling/Organics: A new 5 year contract will start October 1, 2013. Rates
for 2014 are being revised slightly, and are based on a “pay as you throw” philosophy,
working towards a progressive cost per gallon versus the current regressive cost per
gallon structure. In addition to modifying the rate structure, the City will have one
smaller service level for garbage at 20 gallons, and with the addition of the voluntary
organics program, the community will have more flexibility in how they choose to
dispose of or recycle items.
The changes that are recommended are consistent with information Council received in the past
and are in line with the goals of achieving long-term sustainability in the funds. For 2014, the
approximate cumulative effect on a typical residential property for all the utility rate adjustments
would be an increase of $39.80 per year, or approximately $3.32 per month. This equates to an
approximate 4.00% overall increase in utility rates for 2014 when compared to 2013. This
calculation is based on a family of four using 30 units of water per quarter (22,500 gallons), and
60 gallon solid waste service. The recommended rates will be in place for consumption or
services provided beginning on January 1, 2014 if Council concurs with the recommendation.
Detailed information on recommendations on rates will be provided to Council at upcoming
meetings.
Special Study Session Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 1) Page 6
Title: 2014 Budget Discussion
NEXT STEPS:
As the 2014 budget process continues, the following preliminary schedule snapshot has been
developed for Council:
September 3 (Tues) Council establishes 2014 preliminary property tax levies.
(Can be reduced in the future, not increased for final property tax levy.)
October 14 Review and discussion of 2014 budget, CIP, utility rates and LRFMP.
Directors present as needed.
November 12 (Tues) Final budget discussion prior to Truth in Taxation Public Hearing.
December 2 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing.
December 16 Council adopts 2014 budget, final property tax levies, CIP and utility rates.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
ESTIMATED QUARTERLY UTILITY BILL
ACTUAL 2013 AND PROPOSED 2014
Household Size 4
Units per quarter 30
Solid Waste Service 60-gallon
Meter size 3/4 inch
Actual Proposed Dollar Percent
Service Type 2013 2014 Change Change Notes
Water
Per unit rate - Tier 1 1.44$ 1.49$ 0.05$ 3.00%
Service charge 15.03$ 17.47$ 2.44$ 16.00%
State testing fee 1.59$ 1.59$ -$ 0.00%
Consumption 43.20$ 44.70$ 1.50$ 3.00%
Sewer
Service charge 13.43$ 13.83$ 0.40$ 3.00%
Per unit 2.61$ 2.69$ 0.08$ 3.00%
Consumption 78.30$ 80.70$ 2.40$ 3.00%
Storm Drainage
Service charge 16.00$ 17.60$ 1.60$ 10.00%
Bassett Creek Fee*1.93$ 1.93$ -$ 0.00%Bassett Creek fee
Solid Waste (includes tax)62.97$ 64.58$ 1.61$ 3.00%
Total Bill without Bassett*230.52$ 240.47$ 9.95$ 4.00%Not including BCWMC
Increase per quarter (dollars)9.95$
Increase per year (dollars)39.80$
* Since not all property owners would be charged this fee, it is not included in the dollar or percentage change in total bill.
Special Study Session Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2014 Budget Discussion Page 2
City of St. Louis Park
2014 Preliminary Budget Calendar
Date Department(s) Description
March 29, 2013 All 2014–2018 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is available for update.
May 17, 2013 @ 4:30 pm All Capital Improvement Plan access restricted by Acctg. to Read-Only
June 24 CM/Admin/Acctg. Study Session with Council to discuss 2014 Budget and assumptions.
June 25 @ 11am-noon All
City Manager, Dep. CM and Controller meet with Departments to
discuss any significant changes in business or staffing.
July 15 @ 4:30 pm All
All 2014 Budget worksheets available in Insight to all departments.
This includes all Governmental, Special Revenue and Proprietary
Funds. All revenues and expenditures are to be budgeted including
review of fee schedule and Utility Rate Analyses.
July 22–Aug 2 @ 4:30pm All 1st Review/Edit of 2014 – 2018 CIP by Departments
July 29 @ 4:30pm All
Forms for changes in staffing requests and major changes in programs
due to Accounting.
July 29 @ 4:30 pm Inspections Building revenue projections due to Accounting
August 12
City Manager,
Dept. Directors and
Accounting
High level 2014 Budget, CIP, Utility Rates discussion by City
Council, with City Manager, Department Directors and Accounting in
attendance. More of a proposed levy discussion.
August 30 @ 4:30 pm All 2014 Proposed Budget worksheets and fees due. Access to Read-Only.
September 3 (Tuesday) C.M./Accounting Preliminary 2014 Budget and Property Tax Levy approval by Council
September 9 - 18 Each Department Individual review of budgets – CM, Dep. CM, Director, and Acctg.
By September 15 Accounting
Certification of 2014 Preliminary Property Tax Levy due to Hennepin
County and levy reports due to State of Minnesota
Sep. 23–Oct. 4 @4:30 pm All 2nd and Final Review/Edit of 2014 – 2018 CIP by Departments
October 14
City Manager,
Dept. Directors and
Accounting
Review and discussion of 2014 Budget, CIP, Utility Rates and
LRFMP review and discussion by City Council, with City Manager,
Department Directors and Accounting in attendance.
October 15 – Oct. 30 All
Final review of all 2014 revenues and expenditures for all funds. In
addition, review of the CIP, Utility Rates and LRFMP.
October 30 @ 4:30 pm All Final changes submitted to City Manager/Deputy C.M and Controller
November 12 (Tuesday) CM/Admin/Acctg. Final Budget Discussion with City Council prior to TNT hearing
December 2, 2013 Accounting Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and Budget Presentation
December 9 (if needed) C.M./Accounting Council discussion of any 2014 Budget related items (if necessary)
December 16, 2013 C.M./Accounting
2014 Budget, Final Property Tax Levies (City and HRA), 2014 Utility
Rates, and 2014 – 2018 CIP approved by Council.
By December 20, 2013 Accounting Certification of tax levy and other required forms – Due 12-30-13
By December 31, 2013 Accounting 2014 Budgets uploaded from Insight into JDE.
January, 2014 Accounting Summary Budget Report to OSA - due 1/31/2014.
Note: Items in blue are meetings with the City Council
Special Study Session Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2014 Budget Discussion Page 8
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Mayor, City Council and Economic Development Authority Compensation
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council is asked to notify staff if they would like to change the
compensation levels for Mayor, City Council and Economic Development Authority members.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to change the compensation of Mayor,
Council or EDA members?
BACKGROUND: It was requested that this item be discussed at a Study Session.
Minnesota Statute 415.11 states that Council can set their own salaries in such amount that they
deem reasonable. Any increases to salaries must take effect after the next municipal election but
any decreases to salaries can take effect anytime.
A history of Mayor, Council, and EDA salaries follows:
EDA
Year Council Mayor EDA President
2010-Present $6,807 $11,796 $4,299 $4,299
2008-09 $7,165 $12,417 $4,299 $4,299
2006-07 $7,165 $10,985 $4,299 $5,731
2002-05 $6,365 $9,760 $3,819 $5,092
2000-01 $6,000 $9,000 $3,600 $4,800
1985-99 $4,800 $7,200 $2,400 $3,600
As a reminder, Council decreased their salaries by 5% effective January 1, 2010.
Other metro area suburbs with a population between 25,000 – 90,000 have salaries as shown in
the table below:
Mayor/Council Salary Survey - June 2013
City Mayor Salary Council Salary
Andover $ 9,500.00 $ 7,500.00
Apple Valley $ 11,220.00 $ 8,028.00
Blaine $ 13,367.00 $ 10,000.00
Bloomington $ 26,400.00 $ 12,396.00
Brooklyn Center $ 11,500.00 $ 8,805.00
Brooklyn Park $ 17,100.00 $ 11,400.00
Burnsville $ 12,000.00 $ 8,400.00
Coon Rapids $ 14,000.00 $ 12,250.00
Cottage Grove $ 9,216.00 $ 6,780.00
Eagan $ 13,624.00 $ 10,005.00
Eden Prairie $ 9,900.00 $ 7,500.00
Edina $ 10,348.00 $ 7,758.00
Fridley $ 10,531.00 $ 8,650.00
Inver Grove Heights $ 9,000.00 $ 7,000.00
Lakeville $ 9,996.00 $ 8,664.00
Special Study Session Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Mayor, City Council and Economic Development Authority Compensation
Maple Grove $ 14,500.00 $ 12,500.00
Maplewood $ 12,855.00 $ 11,314.00
Minnetonka $ 12,000.00 $ 9,000.00
Plymouth $ 14,000.00 $ 10,146.00
Richfield $ 10,379.00 $ 8,070.00
Roseville $ 9,300.00 $ 7,020.00
Shakopee $ 7,854.00 $ 6,715.00
Shoreview $ 9,156.00 $ 6,792.00
Woodbury $ 11,004.00 $ 8,100.00
AVERAGE $ 12,031.25 $ 8,949.71
St. Louis Park $ 11,796.00 $ 6,807.00
St. Louis Park w/ EDA $ 16,095.00 $ 11,106.00
What are the next steps?
• Council will let staff know if there is to be a change in compensation.
• If there is to be a change to Mayor and/or Council salaries, a public hearing along with 1st
and 2nd readings are required to pass an ordinance to make the change effective.
• If there is to be a change to EDA Commissioner and/or EDA President salaries, a resolution
is required to make the change effective.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Funds for Mayor and Council salaries are
in the general fund. Funds for EDA Commissioner and President salaries are from the EDA
(non-general fund).
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
Prepared by: Ali Fosse, HR Coordinator
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 5, 2013
1. Call to Order
President Santa called the meeting to order at 7:21 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Sue Santa, Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia
Ross, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Commissioners absent: None.
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr.
Hunt), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes July 1, 2013
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as presented.
5. Reports
5a. EDA Vendor Claims
It was moved by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Hallfin, to accept for
filing Vendor Claims for the period June 22 through July 26, 2013.
The motion passed 7-0.
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business
7a. Purchase Agreement: 4601 Highway 7. EDA Resolution No. 13-10.
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and proposed Purchase Agreement to acquire the
former Professional Instruments property consisting of two parcels for a total of 3.16
acres. He advised that EDA ownership of the parcel will provide the City with control of
future use and will ensure ownership is consistent with the City’s preliminary station area
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2013
plans. He stated that clearance of the site will improve the appearance of the CSAH 25
corridor and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the EDA’s previous strategic
acquisitions along Highway 7. He stated there are currently two month-to-month leases
on the property, one with a subsidiary of Professional Instruments and the other with
Clear Channel that rents space for two billboards and the seller does not want these leases
to encumber the sale of the property and has given notice to terminate these leases. He
advised that Clear Channel is entitled to the cost of dismantling and removing the
billboards or the depreciated value in place, whichever is less, and if the EDA’s
relocation obligations for the billboards prove to be more significant than anticipated, the
Purchase Agreement gives the EDA the right to terminate the Purchase Agreement. He
stated a Phase I environmental assessment identified no recognized environmental
conditions and staff believes it would be prudent to conduct a limited Phase II assessment
to determine the presence of hazardous substances. He advised this determination would
be important should the EDA seek to obtain a no association determination for such
substances in the future, adding that one of the contingencies in the Purchase Agreement
requires that the results of the environmental assessment must be acceptable to the EDA.
He pointed out one minor revision to the Purchase Agreement agreed to by the seller that
extends the due diligence period to 90 days to allow the City time to complete the Phase
II assessment and quantify the EDA’s exposure on relocation costs. He advised the
purchase price is $2,250,000, which is the lower end of the range for recent comparable
sales. He stated that staff will further consult with the EDA on the Phase II
environmental assessment and relocation settlement amounts to confirm that the EDA
wishes to proceed with the purchase with closing before the end of the year.
Commissioner Spano asked if the thirty day extension was sufficient and whether the
City has the option to request another extension if additional time is needed to complete
due diligence on the property.
Mr. Hunt replied that the consultant has indicated the City should be able to complete its
environmental assessment work within ninety days, particularly given the fact that the
City has completed its Phase I work.
Commissioner Sanger requested an estimate on the cost to correct any environmental
conditions on the site.
Mr. Hunt explained that the MPCA requires that whenever any recognized environmental
conditions are identified, they must be noted in the Phase I report. In this case, there was
some staining on the floor, and there was some fill material that needs further
investigation to determine if there are any substantive environmental issues.
Commissioner Mavity noted a 25% difference between the assessed value versus the
purchase price plus additional costs to prepare the site for redevelopment in the future
and requested assurance that City will not lose money on the purchase.
Mr. Hunt stated the City Assessor has indicated the purchase price is well within market
and below the $19 per square foot paid for the McGarvey site. He added the market is
fluid around future light rail stations and a recent market study indicated these
strategically located sites are highly sought after and in high demand.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2013
President Santa requested information about what the site will look like after the building
is demolished.
Mr. Harmening stated that after demolition of the building, the site would be vegetated
and maintained by the City, adding it will not be used for a parking lot.
It was moved by Commissioner Mavity, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to adopt EDA
Resolution No. 13-10 Approving the Purchase Agreement Between the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority and 4601 Highway 7 LLC.
The motion passed 7-0.
8. Communications - None
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:33 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Secretary President
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Agenda Item: 5a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: EDA Vendor Claims
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing EDA Vendor Claims for the period
July 26 through August 9, 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: EDA Vendor Claims
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:49:35R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
74,244.05AQUILA COMMONS G & A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTAQUILA SENIOR LLC
74,244.05
57,955.24WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTBELT LINE PROPERTIES INC
57,955.24
100.00HOIGAARD 2010A DEBT SERV G&A FISCAL AGENT FEESBOND TRUST SERVICES CORP
450.002008B GO TAX INCREM BONDS G&A FISCAL AGENT FEES
550.00
175,249.31CSM TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTCSM CORPORATION
175,249.31
303,075.81WEST END TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTDUKE REALTY CORP
303,075.81
21,071.55EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTEDGEWOOD INVESTORS LLC
21,071.55
200.00OAK HILL II OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESEHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC
137.00WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
137.00ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
91.00HSTI G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,130.50VICTORIA PONDS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
93.00PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
137.00CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
137.00MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
141.00PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
137.00EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
493.00ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
137.00WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
137.00AQUILA COMMONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
137.00HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
93.00HARD COAT G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
3,337.50
102,705.02ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTELLIPSE ON EXCELSIOR LLC
102,705.02
183,233.33PARK COMMONS G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTEXCELSIOR & GRAND LLC
183,233.33
Economic Devlopment Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 5a)
Title: EDA Vendor Claims Page 2
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:49:35R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
530,987.08PARK COMMONS G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTGOTTMAR LLC
530,987.08
115.437015 WALKER-REYNOLDS WELD PROP OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGREEN HORIZONS
115.43HWY 7 & LOUISIANA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
173.14PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
404.00
70,348.93HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTHIGHWAY 7 BUSINESS CENTER LLC
70,348.93
15,000.00PUBLIC ART BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESINPLAINSIGHT ART
15,000.00
2,796.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A BLDG & CONTENTS INSURANCELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE
2,796.00
3,000.00HRA LEVY G&A LEGAL SERVICESLOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP
3,000.00
149,147.30MILL CITY G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTMSP REAL ESTATE INC.
149,147.30
209.49DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A TELEPHONENEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
209.49
7,419.49DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSEH
7,419.49
69,805.49CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-VISIONST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS
69,805.49
200.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSST LOUIS PARK SUNRISE ROTARY
200.00
48,884.00VICTORIA PONDS G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMTSVK DEVELOPMENT INC.
48,884.00
16.07HWY 7 & LOUISIANA ELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY
16.07
Report Totals 1,819,639.66
Economic Devlopment Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 5a)
Title: EDA Vendor Claims Page 3
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 7a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty Limited
Partnership and Dolce Living Investments, LLC
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the Assignment
and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty Limited Partnership and
Dolce Living Investments, LLC related to The West End project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA find that the Assignment and Assumption of the
Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty Limited Partnership and Dolce Living
Investments, LLC is in the best interest of the City and its residents?
SUMMARY:
The Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment of May 17, 2010 between the
EDA, the City, and Duke Realty LP (the "Redeveloper") provides that whenever the Redeveloper
wishes to convey any portion of the Redevelopment Property and assign its obligations under the
Contract to a third party, the EDA and City must review and formally approve the proposed
assignment. Duke is selling the former Chili’s and Olive Garden restaurant sites to Dolce Living
Investments. Dolce intends to redevelop both sites as residential use; however they recognize
they are acquiring the property without any guarantee they will gain zoning approval from the
City for their projects. Approval of the Assignment does not constitute approval of Dolce
Living’s proposed development(s) and in fact increases the City’s control over the development
of the subject site. Approval of the Assignment means that Dolce Living must comply with all
the obligations and conditions of the Redevelopment Contract applicable to this site including
limits on uses (no gun shops, etc.) and requirements for insurance, among other things. The
Redeveloper has provided a proposed Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
and has requested that the EDA and City provide written approval of the Assignment by
executing the Consent, Estoppel and Agreement attached to the Assignment.
The EDA’s legal counsel has reviewed the proposed Assignment and the attached Consent, and
recommends the EDA and City approve and consent to this document, which is substantially
similar to the previous Assignment documents approved by the City and EDA in the past.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Under the proposed Assignment and
Assumption Agreement, Dolce Living Investments, LLC assumes the financial obligations that
were to be incurred by Duke Realty under the Redevelopment Contract as it pertains to the
Redevelopment Property. All costs associated with this agreement (Kennedy & Graven) are to be
paid by Duke Realty.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN DUKE REALTY LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP AND DOLCE LIVING INVESTMENTS, LLC
BE IT RESOLVED By the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority ("Authority") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Authority is currently administering its Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Project")
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 ("HRA Act"), and within the Project
has established The West End Tax Increment Financing District (“TIF District”).
1.02. The Authority, the City of St. Louis Park (“City”) and Duke Realty Limited
Partnership (the “Redeveloper”) entered into an Amended and Restated Contract for Private
Redevelopment Dated as of May 17, 2010 (the “Contract”), regarding redevelopment of a portion of
the property within the TIF District.
1.03. The Redeveloper proposes to convey a portion of the property that is the subject of
the Contract (the “Subject Property”) to Dolce Living Investments, LLC (the “Assignee”), and the
Assignee is seeking to redevelop the Subject Property with housing.
1.04. In connection with such conveyance, Redeveloper seeks to assign certain obligations
of Redeveloper related to the Subject Property to the Assignee, and the Assignee agrees to accept
such obligations, all pursuant to an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
between Redeveloper and Assignee (the “Assignment”).
1.05. The Board has reviewed the Assignment and finds that the approval and execution of
the Authority’s consent thereto are in the best interest of the City and its residents.
Section 2. Authority Approval; Other Proceedings.
2.01. The Assignment, including the attached Consent, Estoppel and Agreement of the
Authority related thereto, as presented to the Board is hereby in all respects approved, subject to
modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the
President and Executive Director, provided that execution of the consent to the Assignment by such
officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval.
2.02. The President and Executive Director are hereby authorized to execute on behalf of
the Authority the Consent, Estoppel and Agreement attached to the Assignment and any other
documents requiring execution by the Authority in order to carry out the transaction described in the
Assignment.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living
2.03. Authority staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to carry
out the intent of this resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority August 19, 2013
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living
Page 4
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 5
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 6
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 7
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 8
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 9
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 10
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 11
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 12
Economic Development Authority Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living Page 13
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Presentation: 2a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Book Presentation by Dr. Robert Ramsey
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. Dr. Robert (Bob) Ramsey will be in
attendance to present to the City Council his recent book titled “Creating Vital Aging
Communities – How You and Your Community Can Age Successfully Together”.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: Dr. Ramsey expressed an interest in presenting his latest book to the Council on
successful aging. Dr. Ramsey’s has been very active in sharing his thoughts and insights on this
topic in the community for some time now, and the St. Louis Park community has benefited
greatly from that.
Printing of the book was made possible by funding from the Park Nicollet Foundation and the
Jewish Family and Children Services of Minneapolis.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared & Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JULY 8, 2013
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 8:32 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia Ross, Susan
Sanger, Sue Santa, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Community Development (Mr.
Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
2a. SWLRT Letter and Comments to the SWLRT Project Office
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and stated the SWLRT project is an important
project for St. Louis Park and the metro region and resolving the freight rail issue is one
of the key obstacles for figuring out how to make the SWLRT project work, adding the
City’s letter and comments are intended to be constructive toward moving the SWLRT
project forward.
Mayor Jacobs expressed the City Council’s thanks to staff for all their work on the letter
and comments.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to adopt
the letter and comments regarding the freight rail route options, as amended to strike
paragraph 7 on page 3 of the comments regarding colocation alternatives, to revise
paragraph 1(d) on page 4 of the comments related to safety impacts to state that a 50’
buffer is needed between the tracks and private property boundaries, and to make no
changes to the second paragraph of the letter regarding municipal consent, and to direct
staff to distribute the letter and comments to the SWLRT Project Office and others.
Councilmember Hallfin stated the letter and comments will be posted on the City’s
website and indicated Council is available to talk to residents if they have any questions.
Councilmember Spano indicated residents have asked a lot of questions about the process
and timeline of the SWLRT project and encouraged residents to copy Mr. Locke and/or
Mr. Harmening on emails because City staff is better equipped to answer questions
related to the process and timeline.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Special City Council Meeting Minutes of July 8, 2013
Mayor Jacobs requested information regarding release of the cost estimates.
Mr. Locke advised that the SWLRT Project Office will be working through the
committee process and intends to present the cost estimates on July 25th at the Citizens
Advisory Committee meeting.
Councilmember Sanger stated that the SWLRT Project Office will present information
regarding cost estimates to Council at a special study session tentatively scheduled for
July 29th.
The motion passed 7-0.
3. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:38 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JULY 22, 2013
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity (arrived at 6:34 p.m.),
Julia Ross (arrived at 6:35 p.m.), Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Jake Spano.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms.
Walsh), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther),
Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guests: Victor Pechaty (HGA), David Graham and Justin Merkovich (ESG Architects).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – July 29 and August 12, 2013
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed special study session agenda for July 29, 2013, and the
proposed study session agenda for August 12, 2013. He advised that the August 12th study
session agenda will also include discussion of the West End PUD primarily related to parking.
2. Community Center Final Report – Cost Estimate and Site Analysis
Ms. Walsh presented the staff report and introduced Mr. Victor Pechaty, Vice President of
Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc. (HGA).
Mr. Pechaty presented the site analysis prepared for the W. 36th Street site referred to as the
“Urban Edge West” design and explained that the Urban Edge West site is just over one acre and
they were not able to provide parking and a 104,000 square foot building on the same parcel so
this option assumes collaborative parking with the Burlington site; in addition, the building
would have to extend four stories because of the small footprint of this site resulting in a
construction cost premium to stack large spaces like gymnasiums and pools on top. He stated
the Urban Edge West design includes two levels of underground parking to accomplish parking
on the site with the remainder of parking in a new four-story parking ramp south of the building,
adding that parking would be replaced on a 1:1 ratio and the Urban Edge West Design provides a
total of 1,140 parking stalls. He stated there might be opportunities to look at some parking
efficiencies either by assuming not every program is occupied simultaneously as well as transit
options that could lower the amount of parking required. He presented the cost estimate for the
Urban Edge West design, noting the cost estimate is based on today’s dollars and factors in
inflation costs for the construction industry. He explained that a 20% multiplier was also
included for soft costs, e.g., surveys, soil borings, design fees, furniture, and equipment and the
total project cost for the Urban Edge West design is approximately $50 million.
Councilmember Santa asked if the building costs assume a level of green technology.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: City Council Study Session Minutes of July 22, 2013
Mr. Pechaty stated the Urban Edge West design is a good candidate for LEED and some
sustainable design elements have been included in the design, adding that specialized systems,
e.g., geothermal heating and cooling, have not been included in the design.
Mr. Walther stated that the baseline assumptions used in the community center design are
equivalent to what was done at the new fire stations.
Councilmember Sanger asked if there is an implicit presumption that the City could work out a
shared parking arrangement on this site.
Mr. Pechaty replied in the affirmative and stated their study determined that even with some
transit related parking savings, this one-acre site is not large enough for a building and parking
ramp.
Councilmember Mavity pointed out that traffic issues will continue to be a challenge in this area
particularly related to light rail and was concerned about generating more traffic in this area.
Mr. Pechaty presented two site analyses prepared for the Rec Center site and stated the
“Gateway” design includes some programs constructed on the Melrose site with a skyway link
crossing over Monterey Drive. He stated the Gateway design has 104,000 square feet and
replaces parking on a 1:1 ratio with the addition of 650 parking stalls, noting this number could
be reduced by transit calculations or a reduction of building programs. He advised this option
provides meeting and gathering facilities, including a banquet hall, on the Melrose site. He stated
that a significant characteristic of this option is the addition of a parking ramp to the south of the
existing building that will accommodate 190 stalls.
Mayor Jacobs expressed concern about the proposed location of the skateboard park and
potential security issues.
Councilmember Mavity asked if the Melrose parking structure could be used to meet the total
number of parking spaces required and whether use of this public parking could result in
eliminating the fourth floor of the proposed parking ramp.
Mr. Pechaty stated this would be an option worth considering adding the site design did not
consider shared parking use with neighboring properties. He then presented the cost estimate for
the Gateway design stating the cost of the skyway element is approximately $2.5 million, the
cost of the building is approximately $32 million, and the cost of the parking ramp is
approximately $12.8 million for a total project cost of approximately $47.5 million. He then
presented the site analysis for the “Parkview” option and explained this option has the building
addition to the south of the existing Rec Center with a two-level parking deck constructed over
the current parking lot. He noted that this option has built more parking on the Melrose site with
no building functions on the Melrose site and no skyway element.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if the parking deck would cover the same footprint that currently
exists on this site.
Mr. Pechaty replied in the affirmative and stated that staff at the Rec Center believes that current
parking availability is sufficient and this design includes no plan for overflow parking. He then
presented the cost estimate for the Parkview design stating the cost of the building is estimated at
$32.7 million and the parking ramp is estimated at $12.5 million for a total cost of $45.2 million.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: City Council Study Session Minutes of July 22, 2013
Councilmember Mavity stated the City could realize some savings if parking on the Melrose site
could be utilized and by taking an entire floor off the parking ramp. She also asked about the
possibility of putting an activity area on top of the parking ramp.
Mr. Pechaty stated this was an option worth studying, adding if this site were selected there may
be some hybrid options that could be considered, e.g., having a gym and pool at grade with
fitness rooms and/or running tracks integrated over a parking deck.
Councilmember Sanger requested that an updated analysis be provided to Council with
information regarding additional property taxes required to pay for the community center based
on the site designs presented this evening.
Councilmember Mavity requested that this analysis take into account the increased residential
development occurring in the City resulting in a higher tax base.
Councilmember Sanger felt that the W. 36th Street site should not be analyzed any further given
the constraints with the site and the assumptions about shared parking.
Mayor Jacobs agreed the W. 36th Street site would not work especially given the existing traffic
issues in this area.
Councilmember Ross agreed with the comments regarding the W. 36th Street site, adding that
these dollar amounts cause her concern, particularly since the City has other significant projects
that will impact taxpayers. She stated she liked the Gateway site design with the community
room located across the street, particularly for banquets or weddings, because any noise from a
banquet or wedding will not spill over into the larger site and vice versa.
Councilmember Santa agreed the W. 36th Street site would not work adding this site can never be
expanded. She stated she liked the Parkview design because it builds on the synergy happening
at the Rec Center and at Wolfe Park, adding the Parkview design begs for a remodel of the Rec
Center and some integration between what is going in a new community center and the current
Rec Center. She stated she conceptually liked the idea of a skyway and a safe crossing at
Monterey Drive, but did not like having the programming split and would prefer to see all
programs in one place. She felt the Parkview design has the potential for providing a building
that could provide relevant services to the community for fifty years and has the ability to expand
and reconfigure in the future if needed.
Councilmember Hallfin stated he was very surprised by the cost estimates and agreed that it
would be helpful to have updated tax base information. He added if Council decides that a
community center is not feasible after further study is done, he would be okay with that.
Councilmember Mavity felt the Gateway design had potential and urged the City to be creative
with the design to accommodate uses that incorporate urban growth and smart growth strategies,
adding she did not like seeing huge parking structures in the design. She acknowledged the
significant cost estimates and questioned whether it would make sense to consider a phased
approach for construction of a community center.
Mr. Pechaty stated that a phased approach is common for this type of project where a master plan
is prepared and the project built incrementally as dollars become available.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Title: City Council Study Session Minutes of July 22, 2013
Ms. Walsh asked if Council was interested in having staff proceed to another level of planning to
cost out each program.
It was the consensus of the City Council that staff should not proceed at this time to another level
of planning to cost out each program.
Councilmember Sanger requested that staff provide information related to overall operational
costs and how fees generated at the community center would offset those costs and how those
costs compare with other community centers.
Ms. Walsh agreed to provide this information to Council.
Mr. Harmening stated the preliminary cost analysis prepared earlier by staff assumed a $25
million project and was prepared in the context of the sidewalks and trails project and the storm
water improvement project, adding that staff will provide an update on all these projects so that
Council has an understanding of how these significant capital projects affect taxpayers.
3. DLC Apartments Concept Plan
Mr. Walther presented the staff report and explained that Dolce Living proposes to redevelop the
former Chili’s site with 163 market rate apartment units with a proposed density of
approximately 100 units per acre. He then introduced Mr. David Graham from ESG Architects.
Mr. Graham presented the concept plans and stated the design vision and purpose for the
proposed development is to extend the vitality of the Shops at West End with 163 dwelling units
on the Chili’s site. He explained that the creation of a new street on private land connecting
Wayzata Boulevard to 16th Street will function as a landscaped public street with parking for
residents and will create pedestrian connections to the Shops at West End. He presented a
drawing of the overall site plan and preliminary massing studies for the building in Phase 1. He
also presented comparative information from the Excelsior and Grand project to demonstrate
how the proposed residential development fits into this location using urban design best practices
in higher density communities.
Councilmember Mavity felt that this kind of density in this location was appropriate. She
expressed reservations about the private street and urged staff to make sure the City has clear
easement access in perpetuity if that approach is used. She also felt this proposal once again
represents a lost opportunity to try to provide more affordable housing in the community.
Councilmember Sanger stated she did not think this site was appropriate for housing and felt it
would make more sense if the site were used for retail, commercial, office, or some combination
thereof, adding that even if consensus is reached to go forward with the residential development,
she felt the proposed density was too high. She stated she would not support a project with so
many small studio and one-bedroom apartments. She urged Council to consider a moratorium
on apartment development and conduct a study regarding whether the City needs any more
apartments and if so, what sizes of apartments are needed as well as where the apartments are
needed. She added she did not think that building so many apartments was good for the long
term health of the community and the goal of providing more housing to help support the City’s
school system.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Title: City Council Study Session Minutes of July 22, 2013
Councilmember Ross agreed this development was missing the mark in terms of affordable
housing and felt this would be a great area to have affordable housing. She agreed that the
proposed density was too high and also expressed concern about existing traffic issues in this
area, stating she would not support the proposed development as currently presented.
Councilmember Santa expressed concern about the proposed density and expressed a growing
concern about the number of rental units being built in the City.
Councilmember Hallfin requested further information regarding the City’s ordinance related to
shading. He also requested information regarding monthly rental rates.
Mr. Walther advised the proposed buildings would not shade existing buildings in violation of
the City’s ordinance and stated the Flats at West End was granted a variance to shade the south
side of the hotel building because it was built before the hotel was built.
Mr. Graham stated that a one bedroom apartment would have a monthly rental of approximately
$1,500-$1,600.
Councilmember Hallfin stated he is a strong advocate for single family homes but in this area
that would not work. He asked if the Olive Garden site is proposed to include rental housing.
Mr. Graham stated the Olive Garden site could include a number of things and will likely include
housing of some kind.
Councilmember Mavity urged Council to refine its policy to give clear direction to developers
related to housing. She added that the target market in this area is different than the Excelsior &
Grand market and did not think that larger apartments in this development would fit this location.
Mr. Graham stated they did a lot of research on home ownership and the trend is that people
want to rent for a while and this represents a great site for apartments. He added these units will
be condominium quality apartments that could be converted in the future if the market changes.
Mayor Jacobs and Councilmembers Mavity and Hallfin stated they generally supported the
concept plan as presented and acknowledged the concerns regarding traffic and density.
Councilmembers Ross, Santa, and Sanger stated they would not support the concept plan as
presented because of the density.
It was the general consensus of the City Council that the proposed density was problematic and
that a refined plan should be prepared and presented to Council.
Mr. Walther advised that staff is in the process of updating the AUAR for the West End and this
information will be presented to Council in August.
Mr. Graham stated they plan to submit a formal PUD amendment application in the near future.
Councilmember Hallfin requested information about the footprint for the proposed development
compared to the Flats at West End.
Mr. Graham explained that this site is 20% larger at 1.6 acres and in order to make this project
viable they need to stick to 160 units, adding that reducing the density by 30% would not work.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3b) Page 6
Title: City Council Study Session Minutes of July 22, 2013
Councilmember Santa requested that Mr. Graham present information to Council on how the
traffic is going to work in this area.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
Councilmember Mavity stated the Business Park Rezoning has come up repeatedly and as noted
in the written staff report, this classification has been looked at in relation to station area
planning and the City has heard that the classification is too restrictive in terms of mixed use
development largely because it does not allow housing. She acknowledged this classification has
a PUD applicable to it but was not sure that this was enough and expressed concern about the
City not wanting to direct the market in these areas. She also raised the possibility of exploring
form based zoning.
Mr. Locke indicated the City received a grant for form based zoning in the Beltline area and
further information will be presented to Council in the near future.
Councilmember Sanger felt that a discussion regarding form based zoning was merited and
would provide an opportunity to incorporate architectural design standards or guidelines in the
ordinances. She referenced the written report regarding the City’s proposed acquisition of 4601
Highway 7 and requested that staff provide information about possible uses for this property and
how it fits with the bank and other properties in the area.
Mr. Locke explained the broad plan for this area has been done in terms of the Beltline station
area planning and some of that is being reconsidered now as part of the community works
planning. He stated it was the City’s desire to control this property now that it is for sale and to
possibly get control of the bank property or to work with the bank on redevelopment of the site
with the goal of creating a more pedestrian oriented site with higher density uses including office
and residential/mixed use.
It was the consensus of the City Council to support the proposed terms for acquiring the property
located at 4601 Highway 7.
Mayor Jacobs discussed the proposed press release regarding SWLRT and reported that Mr.
Brimeyer strongly urged the City to wait a couple of days before issuing the press release, adding
he will speak with Mr. Brimeyer again tomorrow.
The meeting adjourned at 8:37 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
4. Southwest LRT Update
5. June 2013 Monthly Financial Report
6. Second Quarter Investment Report (April – June 2013)
7. Knollwood Development Proposal Update
8. Proposed Property Acquisition: 4601 Highway 7
9. Business Park Rezoning Update
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Minutes: 3c
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
JOINT CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JULY 29, 2013
Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, Sue
Santa, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Julia Ross.
School Board Members present: Chair Pro Tem Jim Yarosh, Ken Morrison, Larry Shapiro, Julie
Sweitzer, Joe Tatalovich, and Superintendent Robert Metz.
School Board Members absent: Chair Bruce Richardson and Vice Chair Nancy Gores.
City Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Community Development (Mr.
Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Organizational Development
Coordinator (Ms. Gothberg), Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording
Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guests: Jim Alexander and Chris Weyer (Southwest LRT Project Office).
1. Southwest LRT Update
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and introduced Mr. Jim Alexander and Mr. Chris Weyer
from the Southwest LRT Project Office (SPO). He noted that the staff report includes comments
regarding the initial station area concept plans that City staff will be providing to the SPO. He
advised that a Notice of Intent to prepare a Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(SDEIS) has been issued with a twenty day window provided for comments and the City will be
submitting comments before the August 12, 2013, deadline.
Mr. Alexander presented a summary of the July 17 and 18 open houses and stated the SPO
received over 900 comments on the DEIS and held over 100 Issue Resolution Team meetings.
He stated that part of the SPO’s process included input from the Business Advisory Committee
(BAC) and Community Advisory Committee (CAC) with public input received during thirteen
open houses and over 155 community stakeholder meetings. He advised the SPO is following a
set of guiding principles for major scoping decisions that was endorsed by the Met Council and
the Met Council will be using this document as it makes decisions on the project. He stated the
design options being discussed tonight include the Brunswick Central freight rail relocation,
Kenilworth deep bore LRT tunnel, and Kenilworth shallow LRT tunnel. He discussed the
feedback received during the June 13, 2013, open houses and stated residents expressed a desire
to select the best investment versus the least costly option; in addition, there was input regarding
colocation stating the tunnel options were seen as a “win-win” for both communities and it
minimizes impacts to parkland and trails. He stated there were a lot of concerns raised about the
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 2
Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 29, 2013
impact of freight rail in the school area as well as concerns about the increased elevation of
freight rail, adding freight structures are viewed as dividing the community.
School Board Member Tatalovich requested further information regarding the guiding principles.
Mr. Alexander advised that the Met Council approved the principles on March 27, 2013, and the
Met Council will use these principles as it makes decisions on the entire project including freight
rail, adding the principles are not weighted and are intended to provide a more qualitative
evaluation as the Met Council weighs each of the issues. He then presented a map of the
Brunswick Central freight relocation scenario and stated they have had discussions with the
railroads regarding an acceptable design and reiterated the railroads and STB need to agree to
any relocation. He explained that the Brunswick Central alignment suggests grades of
approximately 19’ above existing grade and this option bypasses the football field to the east.
He stated that primary cost drivers for the Brunswick Central option include the addition of
underpasses in the northern neighborhoods and an underpass to access the football field,
lowering of TH 7, and reconfiguration of the existing street network south of 33rd.
Mr. Alexander then presented a map of the Kenilworth deep bore LRT tunnel and advised the
tunnel would start west of Lake Street and range from 30-50’ below ground with cut and cover
sections at both ends for a total of 7,500’ for the cut and cover and bored sections. He explained
the West Lake station would be below grade and the tunnel would go under West Lake Street
and would require replacement/reconstruction of the bridge. He stated the tunnel would proceed
under Cedar Lake Parkway and this option eliminates the 21st Street station with the tunnel
ending 1,000’ north of 21st Street. He stated that primary cost drivers for the Kenilworth deep
bore LRT tunnel include the subway tunnel at West Lake, ventilation systems, and ground water
management systems.
Mr. Alexander then presented a map of the Kenilworth shallow LRT tunnel and explained that in
this case the tunnel starts north of the West Lake Street bridge and would cross the water channel
between Lake of the Isles and Cedar Lake. He stated under this option the 21st Street station is
not part of the design and the West Lake station is at grade and would require no reworking of
the West Lake Street bridge. He stated that primary cost drivers for the Kenilworth shallow LRT
tunnel include restricted construction access and ground stabilization at the Burnham Road
bridge piers, adding the SPO believes this bridge can be preserved because the piers extend 13’
below ground and they can go between the piers to make this option work. He discussed the
freight rail common scope elements and costs associated with both freight rail and light rail,
stating that these common scope elements are estimated at $85-$90 million. He noted these costs
are fully built up costs and include contingency costs and inflation adjustments. He advised the
Brunswick Central option is estimated at $190-$200 million, the Kenilworth deep bore LRT
tunnel option is estimated at $320-$330 million, and the Kenilworth shallow LRT tunnel is
estimated at $150-$160 million, adding that each of these options would be an additional $85-
$90 million for the freight rail common scope elements referred to earlier. He indicated the SPO
will present the recommended scope and cost to the Corridor Management Committee and the
Met Council on August 14, 2013, followed by a request for approval on the scope and cost to the
Transportation Committee on August 26, 2013, and to the Met Council on August 28, 2013.
Councilmember Santa asked who would be responsible for maintenance of the new freight rail
tracks proposed under the design options.
Mr. Alexander replied the SPO will need to have further conversations with CP as the current
owner of MN&S regarding maintenance of the tracks.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 3
Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 29, 2013
Councilmember Santa asked if this will include the portion of the tracks where it currently goes
south.
Mr. Alexander replied in the affirmative, adding the switching wye would be rendered obsolete
and removed and the storage track would be removed as well.
School Board Member Morrison requested further information about how close the freight rail
tracks would be to PSI and the football field under the relocation option.
Mr. Alexander explained that the freight rail tracks under the Brunswick Central relocation
option are proposed to be approximately 70’ east of the edge of the existing stadium and the
centerline of the freight rail at its closest point to PSI would be approximately 162’.
Councilmember Spano requested further information regarding construction impacts, e.g., noise
and impacts of machinery.
Mr. Weyer advised that in the case of relocation, work could be done during the time when CP
does not operate, e.g., long weekends, adding that all work would have to be well coordinated to
keep the railroad in service during construction. He stated there would be similar challenges
with colocation in order to keep an active freight rail operational during construction while
building the tunnel. He pointed out the Northstar line was built next to an active railroad.
Board Member Shapiro requested further information about what happens to the playground.
Mr. Alexander stated the Brunswick Central alignment would go through the playground and the
SPO believes the play area could be moved to other areas next to the berm.
Councilmember Mavity stated that noise and vibration issues have been raised as a key concern
and requested the SPO provide comparisons of noise and vibration under each of the scenarios,
especially given the proposed elevation of some of the tracks.
Mr. Alexander advised the SPO has been doing ambient testing to understand those issues and
once the Met Council makes a decision, further analysis would be performed.
Councilmember Mavity felt that understanding the noise and vibration issues would be a critical
piece of information to understand before the Met Council makes its decision.
Councilmember Hallfin suggested that the School Board consider using the parking lot area next
to Park Spanish Immersion School for green space for a playground area to replace the
playground space displaced by the freight rail.
School Board Member Sweitzer indicated the School Board has talked about the playground area
referred to by Councilmember Hallfin. She stated this freight rail reroute would eliminate the
grass area that is the playground so it eliminates the playground as well as putting the train right-
of-way close to the edge of the blacktop. She pointed out that the other half of PSI includes the
early childhood program and there are a lot of families in this area and the parking lot is full.
She added it is not just a matter of moving the playground area but also putting trains in an area
where children are playing.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 4
Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 29, 2013
Councilmember Sanger stated she has heard some assertions that the design options would lead
to a dewatering of Lake of the Isles and/or Cedar Lake and asked if the SPO has done any
hydrology studies to look at the potential impact of tunnels on these lakes.
Mr. Alexander replied that the ground water is 20’ at the south end and the tunnel would be
designed and built as watertight as possible. He stated the tunnels are not 100% watertight so
there would be areas with a permanent ground water management system to take water out of the
tunnel and putting it into the storm or sanitary sewer. He added the amount of water is minimal
and he did not see this as a technical issue.
School Board Member Tatalovich indicated the guiding principles state the principles were
established to provide a clear and transparent process and encouraged the SPO and the Met
Council to follow these principles and make the process as quantitative as possible by ranking
and weighing the principles based on feedback from residents.
Councilmember Santa stated that both relocation scenarios go through the City’s existing storm
water retention pond and the proposed berm will change how storm water is handled in the City
and requested further information about the types of accommodations, if any, that the Met
Council will be making to handle storm water created or displaced in the City.
Mr. Alexander advised the Brunswick Central alignment goes through the storm water pond
south of 33rd and north of Lake Street and the SPO engineers believe a manageable system can
be put in place to accommodate the City’s storm water needs. He added the SWLRT project is
responsible for making the City whole if the project impacts the City’s storm water system.
Councilmember Spano requested information about project costs and recent articles indicating
the project budget had gone up. He also asked if funds have been identified for the project.
Mr. Alexander explained the $1.25 billion figure did not include freight rail because at the time
they submitted their request to enter PE, freight rail was not part of the project and had to be
added into the total project cost figures. He stated that funding for the project includes 50% from
the FTA, 30% from CTIP, 10% from Hennepin County, and 10% from the State and advised that
the budget range is over the original $1.25 billion and they will have to manage those figures
throughout the process going forward.
School Board Member Sweitzer requested information regarding mitigation and mitigation costs.
Mr. Alexander acknowledged the City’s suggested mitigation items, including homes, and stated
the design does not include all mitigation. He advised that once a final decision is made the SPO
will prepare the SDEIS and FDEIS to identify mitigation where needed, adding they have
included a contingency of approximately 30% and that contingency will draw down as they start
identifying those items that need to be included as part of the overall project.
Councilmember Mavity stated the City has done traffic modeling at Belt Line and Wooddale to
look at traffic impacts with freight rail in a colocation model, particularly Belt Line where a 600-
stall parking structure is proposed. She stated another key issue for the City is having grade
separation at Belt Line and she felt the colocation costs should include grade separation,
particularly given the updated freight traffic volumes recently provided to Council.
Mr. Alexander stated that these costs are not currently included in the budget.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 5
Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 29, 2013
School Board Chair Pro Tem Yarosh asked what would happen if the athletic field has to be
taken as part of the project.
Mr. Alexander stated the SPO/Met Council does not have jurisdiction to condemn property
without first demonstrating a project need. He stated if the football field were impacted under
the Brunswick West option, there would be a cost owed to the School District to make the
School District whole for the taking of the field.
Councilmember Santa requested information about mitigation costs and the timeline for
determining mitigation. She indicated the SPO will be seeking municipal consent in the fourth
quarter of 2013 and questioned how the SPO can expect the City to make a rationale decision
without all of this information beforehand. She also asked about the timeline for completing the
noise and vibration study, hydrology study, and storm water management plan.
Mr. Alexander stated that mitigation will be identified as part of the SDEIS and FDEIS and they
will start costing out mitigation through the environmental process. He indicated the Central
Corridor did not have all mitigation identified during final design and advised they would
continue to work with all five cities and the County throughout the process on mitigation. He
stated the storm water system will be part of the ongoing design of the project; evaluations
regarding noise and vibration will be done as they move through the process and the SPO will
not have all of these issues identified for municipal consent, adding that municipal consent is
intended to be high level and set the stage for layout of track and station locations. He agreed to
provide an example of the Central Corridor municipal consent.
Councilmember Mavity requested that the Met Council provide a visual rendering of the reroute.
She felt it was the Met Council’s responsibility to provide the City with costs and modeling for
noise, traffic, and vibration and the City needs that information prior to making a decision on
municipal consent.
Councilmember Sanger stated it was her understanding the FTA has not indicated that a vote on
municipal consent is required in 2013 and felt the SPO should provide all requested information
to the City prior to municipal consent even if it means delaying the municipal consent vote.
Mr. Alexander stated the FTA does not dictate municipal consent and acknowledged the
concerns that the process is moving too fast but the SPO is trying to get decisions made in a
rapid fashion to keep on schedule and keep costs down.
Councilmember Spano requested an overhead view of the alignment as it approaches the football
stadium and playground area including dimensions from the centerline and berm.
Mr. Alexander agreed to provide this information.
Councilmember Sanger requested a video simulation showing the entire reroute.
Mr. Weyer stated this simulation was done for light rail and indicated the SPO would take
Councilmember Sanger’s request under consideration.
Discussion regarding Station Areas
Mr. Locke presented design drawings of the Belt Line, Wooddale, and Louisiana Avenue
stations and explained the Louisiana Avenue station platform is shown close to Oxford and the
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 6
Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 29, 2013
City has suggested moving the station platform farther south on the switching wye and closer to
the hospital. He stated the City has suggested moving the Wooddale station platform farther to
the east to Xenwood and extending Xenwood to the south frontage road. He stated the City has
suggested a grade separation at Belt Line under the light rail/freight rail/trail corridor to address
circulation issues in this area. He pointed out the drawings show a 500+ vehicle park and ride
and the City has suggested this park and ride should be an interim use for future redevelopment
or integrated into a development similar to Excelsior & Grand that serves a broader purpose.
Councilmember Sanger expressed concern about parking on Belt Line and stated it will be
important to determine the scope of parking needed at this location. She added the City will also
need a plan for redeveloping a site that will be used for parking and stated she would rather have
a smaller park and ride than at grade surface lots. She also questioned how pedestrians would be
provided safe passage to the Louisiana Avenue station.
Councilmember Santa expressed concern about how mass transit buses fit into the planning
process. She stated there is a lot of surface parking encouraging people to drive to the transit
stations but did not see any plans for getting people without a car to the station areas.
Councilmember Mavity expressed concern about the Louisiana Avenue station and felt that
having a parking lot with a bridge over to the light rail station was not welcoming or safe. She
added there are no development opportunities around this site resulting in lost economic
investment for jobs. She felt the Belt Line station park and ride represented a short-term strategy
and expressed concern about increased congestion in this area.
Mr. Locke indicated that further information regarding station areas will be presented to Council
at a future study session.
2. Update on School District Referendum
Superintendent Metz presented information on the School District’s referendum and advised that
the School District initiated a community survey of residents about a possible referendum and
the School Board will meet on August 5 to review the survey results and possible tax impact. He
stated the School Board will meet on August 12 to approve ballot questions and on August 13 an
informational campaign on the referendum will begin. He explained that possible considerations
for the referendum include a technology levy because the current technology levy expires after
the 2014-15 school year. He stated another referendum consideration is to ask for bond money
to keep up with repairs and improvements on the School District buildings. He advised that
School District enrollment has increased and the recent legislation regarding all-day kindergarten
will result in space issues and the School District is considering adding classrooms at Aquila,
Peter Hobart, and Susan Lindgren as a cost efficient way to manage enrollment versus opening
another building. He stated a fourth consideration is to request additional operating money to
keep the School District’s programming up to date and keeping class sizes down.
Councilmember Sanger requested that the School District provide Council with a summary of
the School District’s analysis and a list of items being asked for in the referendum as well as the
impact to the average homeowner in the community.
Councilmember Hallfin requested information about the last referendum as well as information
about the number of students in the School District when there were four elementary schools
open and the School District’s threshold for determining when to open another school.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3c) Page 7
Title: Joint City Council/School Board Meeting Minutes of July 29, 2013
School Board Member Shapiro stated the technology levy was passed fifteen years ago and there
was a building referendum four years ago. He advised that opening a school costs $500,000-
600,000 of operating money over and above the School District’s budget which would take away
what the District can spend somewhere else whereas adding on to an existing school would
require the School District to incur capital costs but no operating costs. He added if the School
District were to open Cedar Manor it would require ten teachers and approximately 300
additional students.
School Board Chair ProTem Yarosh stated the technology levy is a renewal levy of
approximately $1.75 million and the capital bonding referendum is approximately $10 million.
He added the School District also has an opportunity to do a refunding of some of its bonds that
will result in savings.
Superintendent Metz agreed to provide further information to Council following the August 12
School Board meeting.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:36 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Minutes: 3d
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 5, 2013
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia Ross, Susan
Sanger, Sue Santa, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Planning/Zoning
Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Associate Planner (Mr. Kelley), Organizational Development
Coordinator (Ms. Gothberg), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Westwood Hills Nature Center Junior Naturalists Recognition
Mayor Jacobs thanked the Junior Naturalists for all their efforts and stated there were
over sixty youth volunteers in this year’s program.
Ms. Carrie Mandler introduced Ms. Sarah Skinner, Program Coordinator for the Junior
Naturalists program.
Ms. Skinner stated the energy, skills, and commitment of the youth volunteers is critical
to the Nature Center’s ability to continue to offer high quality nature camps to residents
of St. Louis Park and surrounding communities. She indicated the youth volunteers have
volunteered over 1,600 hours and the program seeks to provide an enjoyable environment
in which volunteers can foster leadership skills, take on new levels of meaningful
responsibility, and gain experience working with children, caring for animals, and
assisting adult staff members. She expressed thanks on behalf of the entire staff at
Westwood Hills Nature Center to all the youth volunteers involved in the 2013 program.
Mayor Jacobs presented certificates of appreciation to the Junior Naturalists and thanked
all of them for their service.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes July 8, 2013
The minutes were approved as presented.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 2
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2013
3b. Special Study Session Meeting Minutes July 15, 2013
The minutes were approved as presented.
3c. City Council Meeting Minutes July 15, 2013
The minutes were approved as presented.
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. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance No. 2444-13 amending Chapter 36 of
the City Code pertaining to parking uses, and to approve the summary ordinance for
publication.
4b. Adopt Resolution No. 13-109 accepting work and authorizing final payment in the
amount of $4,540.08 for the 2012 Beltline Boulevard Trail Realignment project with
Midwest Asphalt. – Project No. 20112-1307, Contract No. 116-12.
4c. Approve contract with WSB and Associates, Inc. for engineering consulting services
related to bridge program administration and design for bridge rehabilitation projects
as identified in the Capital Improvement Program (C.I.P.).
4d. Adopt Resolution No. 13-110 authorizing installation of parking restrictions on the
south side of Excelsior Boulevard at 4811- 4815 Excelsior Boulevard.
4e. Adopt Resolution No. 13-111 authorizing installation of parking restrictions at the
Municipal Lot located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Excelsior
Boulevard and Alabama Boulevard.
4f. Confirm appointment of Jack Sullivan to the position of Interim Engineering Director
effective July 15, 2013.
4g. Adopt Resolution No. 13-112 authorizing final payment in the amount of $76,008.65
and accepting work for Fire Station No. 1 Work Scope 24 (Electrical) for Project No.
2008-3001, City Contract No. 37-11.
4h. Adopt Resolution No. 13-113 authorizing final payment in the amount of $36,246.05
and accepting work for Fire Station No. 2 Work Scope 24 (Electrical) for Project No.
2008-3002, City Contract No. 40-11.
4i. Adopt Resolution No. 13-114 authorizing final payment in the amount of $72,487.11
and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2, Work Scope 01 (Earthwork,
Building Demolition, Excavation & Utilities) for Project Nos. 2008-3001 and 2008-
3002, City Contract No. 60-11.
4j. Adopt Resolution No. 13-115 authorizing final payment in the amount of $11,515.00
and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2, Work Scope 25 (Landscaping)
for Project Nos. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002, City Contract No. 74-11.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 3
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2013
4k. Approve for filing Housing Authority Meeting Minutes June 12, 2013.
4l. Approve for filing Vendor Claims.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to
approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of
all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Boards and Commissions
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to appoint
Paul Beck to the Housing Authority for a term expiring on June 30, 2014.
The motion passed 7-0.
6. Public Hearings - None
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Health in the Park Initiative/Blue Cross Blue Shield Funding
Ms. Gothberg presented the staff report and explained that the City is one of nine areas
selected across the state for this three-year initiative with first year funding from Blue
Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) in the amount of $149,990. She stated the City intends to
engage the community and have residents tell the City what active healthy living should
look like in the City.
Councilmember Spano expressed support for the initiative and asked if BCBS has
indicated whether funding will be available for years two and three. He also asked if the
City’s share of funding for years two and three would be available, adding he did not
want this initiative to be funded for only one year.
Ms. Gothberg advised that BCBS has indicated a willingness to fund the City for the next
two years and BCBS has stated they were excited the City is partnering with Twin Cities
Public Television to document this initiative.
Councilmember Sanger requested information about deliverables and how the City will
know whether the initiative has been successful. She also asked if data will be gathered
on people’s health and whether their health has improved as part of this initiative.
Ms. Gothberg stated reports will be provided that outline plans developed with the other
partners and BCBS will be looking at any policy changes and how those changes are
being implemented, as well as sustainability and creating an environment for livability.
She stated that Park Nicollet will look at health data and this data is not within the
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 4
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2013
purview of the City or School District, adding that Park Nicollet will be involved in the
community-wide dialogue.
Councilmember Mavity stated she was excited about the project and thanked staff for
their efforts to secure funding. She asked if the School District would be a partner in the
initiative.
Ms. Gothberg stated the School District will be a partner in this project and
acknowledged the School District’s omission in the staff report.
Councilmember Santa requested confirmation that the City will not have access to an
individual’s private health data that is protected under HIPAA and the data would only be
used by health professionals involved in the project.
Ms. Gothberg stated that this was correct.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to
authorize execution and implementation of the Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) Active
Living Master Agreement for the “Health in the Park” Initiative.
The motion passed 7-0.
8b. Comprehensive Plan Amendment from CIV – Civic to RM- Medium Density
Residential, Wooddale Flats. Resolution No. 13-116.
Mr. Kelley presented the staff report and proposed amendment to the City’s land use map
for the former Most Holy Trinity site from CIV – Civic to RM – Medium Density
Residential, which allows a density of six to thirty units per acre. He presented an aerial
photograph of the site and a drawing of the existing land use map and stated the
development proposal includes one two-story building and five three-story buildings for a
total of 34 units with a density of 14 units per acre and all units are intended to be for sale
with no rentals. He stated all parking is provided on site in garages and surface lots and
there are rooftop decks on the three-story buildings. He stated that traffic concerns were
raised at the neighborhood meetings and SRF conducted a traffic study that found the
proposed use would have similar trip generation as the former church/school with a
reduction of daily trips on Toledo and an increase of daily trips on Utica, as well as lower
a.m. peak hour trips and similar p.m. peak hour trips. He indicated the developer
proposes to fill the site to approximately the same grade as the adjacent streets and
construct an underground storm water management system that connects to the City’s
storm sewer and this system will require a variance from the Watershed District because
no water currently leaves the site and approval of this variance is a condition of approval
of any future applications to the City. He presented a concept rendering of a two-story
building and the three-story building and a comparison of the existing church/school
building height of approximately 38’ compared to the three-story building height of
approximately 48’, noting that the height may change based on technical issues with
filling the site. He stated the proposal meets several of the City’s housing and land use
goals including promoting and facilitating a balanced and sustainable housing stock that
meets diverse needs and the proposed development meets the goals and strategies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 5
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2013
Councilmember Mavity stated the City went through a similar process with the Eliot site
where the Comprehensive Plan was amended first followed by rezoning and approval of
a PUD. She requested confirmation that a designation of Medium Density Residential
means a maximum of thirty units per acre would be allowed. She also requested
information about the maximum height that would be allowed under this proposal.
Mr. Kelley advised the maximum units per acre allowed under Medium Density
Residential would be thirty units and the rezoning would reflect that as well. He stated
the Comprehensive Plan does not dictate height limits and staff believes the correct
zoning for the site would be R-4 because that classification most closely matches the land
performance standards of the proposal, adding that some of these performance standards
may be modified under the PUD. He indicated that Council’s action this evening is to
allow a different type of development to occur on this site and future Council action will
include rezoning and site plan review as well as the PUD.
Councilmember Mavity asked if Council would have an opportunity to add additional
requirements such as noise limits for the rooftop decks during the PUD process.
Mr. Kelley replied in the affirmative.
Councilmember Mavity noted the project will be built as units are sold and expressed
concern about a construction process that could go on for years. She stated that
managing the construction process and making it work for the neighborhood was key to
her approval and requested that staff continue to work with the developer on this issue.
She also expressed concern about making sure there is sufficient financing for the storm
water improvements.
Ms. McMonigal indicated the development agreement will include financial guarantees
and time limits for several items, including the storm water improvements, adding the
storm water improvements must be done before anything is built on the site.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if the project is contingent on approval of the variance
from the Watershed District. He also requested information about the developer’s plans
for the site while waiting to sell additional units.
Mr. Kelley explained that the Watershed District variance is to allow water to leave the
site through a pipe connecting to the City’s storm sewer system and is intended to address
storm water management on the site.
Mr. David Carlson, Gatehouse Properties Ltd., appeared before the City Council and
stated they have a total of ten reservations at this time and they are only taking
reservations through the fourth building to keep control of the inventory and for financing
purposes. He stated they intend to raze the site and start with a three-story building and
the remaining land will likely be hydro seeded. He added the design is unique and sought
after and he was confident the units would be sold in rapid succession.
Councilmember Hallfin felt this was an interesting project and liked that it was owner
occupied housing. He acknowledged this is a difficult location for traffic and was a little
apprehensive about the traffic impacts to the neighborhood.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 3d) Page 6
Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of August 5, 2013
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to adopt
Resolution No. 13-116 approving an amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan for the
City of St. Louis Park under Minnesota Statutes 462.351 to 462.364 – 3998 Wooddale
Avenue South and 4017 Utica Avenue South.
The motion passed 7-0.
9. Communications
Mayor Jacobs reminded residents about Night to Unite tomorrow evening. He stated
there are over 130 block parties scheduled and expressed the City Council’s thanks to all
the block captains and neighborhood association leaders as well as the many volunteers
for their work on this event. He stated residents can contact Ken Sysko in the Police
Department or their neighborhood association with any questions.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:24 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Acceptance of Donation to the City of St. Louis Park and St. Louis Park School
District
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept donation of a spinning outdoor play structure
to the City of St. Louis Park and the St. Louis Park School District in memory of Haysem Sani
and Mohamed Fofana from St. Croix Recreation Company and installer, Contracting Solutions,
Inc.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept this gift with restriction
on its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Mike Basich and St. Croix Recreation Company Inc. are donating a spinning outdoor play
structure feature to the City of St. Louis Park and St. Louis Park School District in memory of
Haysem Sani and Mohamed Fofana. These are the two boys who lost their life this spring on the
Peter Hobart field trip. The equipment is valued at $2,200 and will be installed at the Nelson
Park / Peter Hobart Playground at no cost by Jason Hand of Contracting Solutions, Inc. of
Farmington.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used for playground
equipment to be installed at Nelson Park / Peter Hobart School.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Rick Birno, Recreation Superintendent
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Acceptance of Donation to the City of St. Louis Park and St. Louis Park School District
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION
OF AN OUTDOOR PLAY STRUCTURE TO BE INSTALLED IN NELSON
PARK/PETER HOBART SCHOOL PLAYGROUND
FROM ST. CROIX RECREATION COMPANY AND
CONTRACTING SOLUTIONS, INC.
IN MEMORY OF HAYSEM SANI AND MOHAMED FOFANA
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, St. Croix Recreation Company donated an outdoor play structure (valued at
$2,200) to be installed in Nelson Park / Peter Hobart School Playground by Contracting
Solutions, Inc. at no charge; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to Mike Basich of St. Croix Recreation
Company and Jason Hand of Contracting Solutions, Inc. with the understanding that it must be
installed in Nelson Park / Peter Hobart School Playground.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Acceptance of Donations to the Westwood Hills Nature Center
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept monetary donations from Tom Grimsrud in
memory of Jane Grinsrud in the amount of $30 for the purchase of plants or shrubs at Westwood
Hills Nature Center and a donation from Groves Academy in the amount of $32 for
programming at Westwood Hills Nature Center.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept these gifts with
restrictions on their use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Tom Grimsrud is graciously donating to Westwood Hills Nature Center an amount of $30 for the
purchase of plants or shrubs at Westwood Hills Nature Center in memory of Jane Grimsrud who
passed away last spring.
Groves Academy is graciously donating to Westwood Hills Nature Center an amount of $32 for
programming at Westwood Hills Nature Center.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: These donations will be used at Westwood
Hills Nature Center for a plant or shrub and programming as noted above.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Administrative Secretary
Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Acceptance of Donations to the Westwood Hills Nature Center
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATIONS
FROM TOM GRIMSRUD IN THE AMOUNTS OF $30
TO BE USED TO PURCHASE A PLANT OR SHRUB AND
FROM GROVES ACADEMY IN THE AMOUNT OF $32
TO BE USED FOR PROGRAMMING
AT WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CENTER
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Tom Grimsrud donated $30 to be used to purchase a plant or shrub and
Groves Academy donated $32 to be used toward programming; both at Westwood Hills Nature
Center; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to Tom Grimsrud with the understanding that it
must be used at Westwood Hills Nature Center for the purchase of a plant or shrub, and thanks to
Groves Academy with the understanding that it must be used toward programming at Westwood
Hills Nature Center.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 76-11 Albers Mechanical Contractors, Inc. -
Projects #2008-3001 & #2008-3002
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the
amount of $42,950.00 and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 23
(Mechanical) for Project No. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002, City Contract No. 76-11.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None.
SUMMARY: Bids were received on March 31, 2011 for Two New Fire Stations – Project Nos.
2008-3001 and 2008-3002. The projects included construction of Fire Station No. 1 at 3750
Wooddale Avenue and Fire Station No. 2 at 2262 Louisiana Avenue.
The City used an agency construction manager (CM) delivery method for both fire stations,
rather than a general contractor (GM). With this approach, the City is the owner and general
contractor for the project. The construction manager acts as the city’s advisor and representative
throughout planning, design and construction of the stations. There are 31 different contracts
related to the construction of the two stations.
City Council awarded the contract for Work Scope 23 (Mechanical) for Fire Stations No. 1 and
No. 2 to Albers Mechanical Contractors, Inc. on May 3, 2011, in the amount of $1,640,000.00.
The contractor completed this work at a final contract cost of $1,718,061.00. The $78,061.00
additional costs related primarily to owner directed changes. One notable exception was the
$8,950.00 cost to replace equipment that was vandalized while the building was still under
construction.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Fire Stations Project was programmed
in the Capital Improvement Program for construction in 2011/12 at a total projected cost of
$15,500,000. The final project costs are expected to be approximately $15,100,000.
$12.5 million of this project cost will be paid from bond proceeds issued in December 2010. The
remaining portion will be paid from the Fire portion of the Police and Fire Pension Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Mark Windschitl, Assistant Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 76-11 Albers Mechanical Contractors - Projs #2008-3001 & 3002
RESOLUTION NO. 13 -____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $42,950.00 AND ACCEPTING THE MECHANICAL WORK FOR
FIRE STATIONS NO. 1 AND NO. 2 WITH
ALBERS MECHANICAL CONTACTORS, INC.
CITY PROJECT NO. 2008-3001 AND 2008-3002
CONTRACT NO. 76-11
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated May 3, 2011, Albers Mechanical Contractors,
Inc. satisfactorily completed Work Scope 23 (Mechanical) for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2, as
per Contract No. 76-11.
2. The Construction Manager, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company, recommends final
acceptance of the work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Original Contract Price $1,640,000.00
Change Order #1 $16,628.00
Change Order #2 $31,673.00
Change Order #3 $16,524.00
Change Order #4 $13,236.00
Final Contract Amount $1,718,061.00
Previous Payments ($1,675,111.00)
Balance Due $42,950.00
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 41-11 Bredemus Hardware Co. Inc. - Projects
#2008-3001 and #2008-3002
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the
amount of $7,567.60 and accepting work for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 Work Scope 10
(Hollow Metal Frames, Doors and Finish Hardware) for Project No. 2008-3001 and 2008-3002,
City Contract No. 41-11.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None.
SUMMARY: Bids were received on March 31, 2011 for Two New Fire Stations – Project Nos.
2008-3001 and 2008-3002. The projects included construction of Fire Station No. 1 at 3750
Wooddale Avenue and Fire Station No. 2 at 2262 Louisiana Avenue.
The City used an agency construction manager (CM) delivery method for both fire stations,
rather than a general contractor (GM). With this approach, the City is the owner and general
contractor for the project. The construction manager acts as the city’s advisor and representative
throughout planning, design and construction of the stations. There are 31 different contracts
related to the construction of the two stations.
City Council awarded the contract for Work Scope 10 (Hollow Metal Frames, Doors and Finish
Hardware) for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2 to Bredemus Hardware Co., Inc. on April 11, 2011,
in the amount of $148,735.00. The contractor completed this work at a final contract cost of
$151,352.00. The $2,617.00 additional costs related primarily to owner directed changes.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Fire Stations Project was programmed
in the Capital Improvement Program for construction in 2011/12 at a total projected cost of
$15,500,000. The final project costs are expected to be approximately $15,100,000.
$12.5 million of this project cost will be paid from bond proceeds issued in December 2010. The
remaining portion will be paid from the Fire portion of the Police and Fire Pension Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Mark Windschitl, Assistant Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 41-11 Bredemus Hardware - Projects #2008-3001 & 3002
RESOLUTION NO. 13 -____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $7,567.60.00 AND ACCEPTING THE HOLLOW METAL FRAMES,
DOORS AND FINISH HARDWARE WORK FOR
FIRE STATIONS NO. 1 AND NO. 2 WITH BREDEMUS HARDWARE CO., INC.
CITY PROJECT NO. 2008-3001 AND 2008-3002
CONTRACT NO. 41-11
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated April 12, 2011, Albers Mechanical
Contractors, Inc. satisfactorily completed Work Scope 10 (Hollow Metal Frames, Doors and
Finish Hardware) for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2, as per Contract No. 41-11.
2. The Construction Manager, Kraus-Anderson Construction Company, recommends final
acceptance of the work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Original Contract Price $148,735.00
Change Order #1 $917.00
Change Order #2 $1,700.00
Final Contract Amount $151,352.00
Previous Payments ($143,784.40)
Balance Due $7,567.60
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) for St. Louis Park School District #283 (ISD 283) for an addition to Peter Hobart
Elementary, with conditions as recommended by staff.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the proposed CUP consistent with the zoning ordinance and
the Comprehensive Plan?
SUMMARY: A CUP is requested to construct a two-story addition, comprising two
classrooms, to Peter Hobart Elementary School.
The property is zoned R-2 Single-family Residence and is guided Civic in the Comprehensive
Plan. The lot is approximately 4.66 acres in area. The proposed project meets all zoning and
comprehensive plan requirements.
The St. Louis Park School District (the District) has been experiencing increasing pressure on
current school building capacity. The District is requesting a CUP to add two permanent
classrooms onto the existing building to help alleviate crowded conditions at Peter Hobart
Elementary. The addition would be two stories with one classroom per story and be consistent
with the architecture of the existing building.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Aerial Photo
Draft Resolution
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes
Development Plans
Prepared by: Ryan Kelley, Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Peter Hobart Elementary is located in the Bronx Park Neighborhood. The
property is bordered by 26th St on the south, the Burlington Northern Railroad on the north and
City park land on the east and west.
The school district has experienced an
increase in enrollment in recent years
which has placed a greater demand for
capacity in the elementary schools. The
District would like to add a two-story
addition to the school, to help alleviate
capacity issues. There is also
consideration of future expansion
possibilities at Peter Hobart School,
which may include another classroom
addition, a cafeteria expansion and a
kindergarten classroom addition.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed addition is two-stories and
would be added on to the north-west
corner of the building, extending in to the
adjacent asphalt area to the west of the
school (Figure 2). The addition would
provide two classrooms, one on each
level. The first floor would be 1,596 sq.
ft. and the second floor would be 1,450
sq. ft. The materials and design of the
new addition would match the existing
structure, consisting almost exclusively
of brick and glass. See attached
elevation drawings. Landscaping will be
installed around the north and west
edges of the new building.
The addition does not require any storm
water management practices to be
employed, and it does not affect City
parking requirements.
Construction staging will take place on the northeastern portion of the existing asphalt play area,
with an access road running along the western edge of the playground and asphalt play area. The
entrance to the access road will be just to the west of the southern parking lot entrance.
Construction fencing will separate the construction areas from student areas, and a large portion
of the play areas will be available for student use. See attached site access drawing. The District
hopes to begin construction this fall, and have the project completed in January, 2014.
Figure 1
Figure 2
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 3
Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVIEW:
Schools are allowed in the R-2 Single-Family Residence Zoning District by Conditional Use
Permit. For school uses in the R-2 District, the zoning ordinance reads:
(4) Education (academic) facilities with more than 20 students. The conditions are as follows:
a. Buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from a lot in an R district.
This condition is met.
b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and
pedestrian safety.
This condition is met.
c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R
district.
This condition is met.
d. 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.
This condition is met.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 7, 2013 regarding this CUP. There
was no one present to speak and no comments were submitted. The Planning Commission
recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit, by a vote of 4 – 0, with staff
recommendations. The Planning Commission meeting minutes are attached.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 4
Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)
Aerial Photo
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 5
Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN ADDITION TO
PETER HOBART ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT 6500 WEST 26TH STREET
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Independent School District #283 has made application to the City Council for a
Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-164(c)(3) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for
an addition to the existing Peter Hobart Elementary School as required for Educational
(academic) facilities with more than 20 students within an R-2 Single-Family Residence
District located at 6500 West 26th Street, at the legal description as follows, to-wit:
(Per Warranty Deed Doc. No. 3643873)
All that part of the East 427.4 feet of the Southeast One-Quarter of the Northeast
One-Quarter (SE ¼ of NE ¼) of Section 8, Township 117, Range 21, lying
Southerly of the Southerly right of way line of the Great Northern Railway, and
Westerly of a line drawn parallel with and thirty-three (33) feet Westerly of the
following described line: Beginning at the southeast corner of the Southeast One-
Quarter of the Northeast One-Quarter (SE ¼ of NE ¼) of said Section 8; thence
north along the East line of said Quarter-Quarter, 123.0 feet; thence on a
tangential curve to the left with a radius of 337.03 feet, delta angle 47 degrees 00
minutes for a distance of 276.47 feet; thence on a line tangent to last described
curve for a distance of 107.0 feet; thence on a tangential curve to the right with a
radius of 343.08 feet, delta angle 32 degrees 30 minutes for a distance of 194.61
feet; thence on a line tangent to last described curve for a distance of 76.0 feet and
there terminating.
AND
(Per Waranty Deed Doc. No. 5327796)
All that part of the east 472.4 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter of Section 8, Township 117, Range 21, lying southerly of the southerly
right of way line of the Great Northern Railway, except the east 427.4 feet of the
Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 117, Range
21.
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 13-29-CUP) and the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and
welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions,
the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the
Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The Council has determined that the proposed addition will not be detrimental to the
health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion
nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed use
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 6
Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)
is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. The contents of Planning Case File 13-29-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of
the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The Conditional Use Permit to permit an addition to Peter Hobart Elementary School, as an
Educational Facility with more than 20 students at the location described is granted based on
the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions:
1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with Exhibits
incorporated by reference herein.
2. All necessary permits must be obtained.
3. Prior to issuing the building permit, the following conditions shall be met:
a. Applicant shall submit financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit
in the amount of 125% of the costs of landscaping, and the repair/cleaning of park
property, public streets and utilities.
b. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by the applicant and owner.
4. The applicant shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no
construction activity between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM, Monday through
Frida y, and 10:00 PM and 9:00 AM, Saturday, Sunday and Holidays.
b. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring
properties.
c. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary.
d. Erosion control measures shall be used along all construction related areas.
e. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary
in order to mitigate the impact on surrounding properties.
5. All utilities shall be buried.
6. All City Park Property shall be repaired to the same condition as it was pre-construction.
7. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee
of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval.
8. Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the
building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed.
9. Approval of a Building Permit, which may impose additional requirements.
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 August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Page 7
Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)
Planning Commission Excerpts
August 7, 2013
3. Public Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit for Addition – Peter Hobart Elementary School
Location: 6500 W. 26th Street
Applicant: St. Louis Park Public Schools
Case No.: 13-29-CUP
Ryan Kelley, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. The Conditional Use Permit
is being requested for a small, two-story addition of two classrooms. Future additions
may be considered at a later date.
Commissioner Person asked about other additions being considered.
Mr. Kelley responded that other additions being considered are for more classrooms and
an addition to the cafeteria space.
Commissioner Carper asked about the use of trucks for export and import of soil.
Mr. Kelley reviewed the staging plan for construction.
Paul Aplikowski, Wold Architects, stated the addition will largely sit on existing grade.
There will be a small amount of soil movement, but no large quantities of import or
export. They hope to complete the addition by January.
Chair Robertson asked why the remaining additions are not proposed to be constructed at
this time.
Mr. Aplikowski said that is due to funding. The School District is likely to do a
referendum this fall for further construction.
Commissioner Carper asked about plans for providing outdoor recreational activities for
students during construction.
Mr. Aplikowski stated that most of the playground will still be available. There will be a
fence along the construction road.
Commissioner Person asked if additions are contemplated at Susan Lindgren and Aquila
Schools.
Mr. Aplikowski said additions are contemplated at those locations, pending a referendum.
Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak he
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion recommending approval of the
Conditional Use Permit, subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner
Person seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
PROPOSEDBUILDINGADDITION9 - DWARF BUSH HONEYSUCKLEDiervilla loncera5 - LITTLE PRINCESS SPIREASpiraea japonica 'Little Princess'7 - SNOWMOUND SPIREASpiraea nipponica 'Snowmound'9 - RED GNOME DOGWOODCornus alba sibirica 'Red Gnome'SODSODLANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE SITE PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING7575 GOLDEN VALLEY ROAD SUITE 200 MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55427FAX (763) 544-0531 PH (763) 544-7129PROPOSED CONCRETE WALK / SLABPROPOSED MEDIUM DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTPROPOSED SOD LIMITSPROPOSED SHRUBPROPERTY LINELEGENDCity Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)Page 8
C:\_Revit_Project_Files\132066(CENTRAL)_jwollensak.rvt7/26/2013 9:00:30 AMIndependent School District #283Peter Hobart Elementary - 2013 Classroom AdditionJuly 22, 2013Comm No: 132066\\Minnesota\StPaul\ISD283\Peter Hobart\132066 2 Classroom Addition\02_ARCH\Revit\132066(CENTRAL).rvtUnnamedKEY PLANKEY PLANCity Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)Page 9
8848848838838848848848848848848848848848838838848848828828838848828838848868868878888898918928898888878868918898888918878868918 8 9
8 8 8
8 8 7
8 8 6 8868878868878878878878878878878918918928938918898888878868868888898898 8 8
889PHASE 1 - 2 CLASSROOM ADDITIONCONTRACTOR CONSTRUCTION FENCINGCONTRACTOR VEHICLE ACCESSTEMPORARY DRIVE - PROVIDE"ORANGE" SAFETY FENCE ON BOTHSIDES OF DRIVE60'-0"NOTE:STUDENT HARDPLAY SURFACE AREA TOREMAIN OPERATIONAL DURING SCHOOLDAYSSTUDENTPLAYGROUNDACCESS DOORSNOTE:CONTRACTOR TO RESTORE GRASS AREASUPON REMOVAL OF TEMPORARY DRIVE.30'-0"EXISTING 5' FENCETHE TEMPORARARY DRIVE WILLBE CONSTRUCTED OF WASHEDROCK. SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS.NOTE:FOR ANY CITY PROPERTY; ALL GRASS AREAS ARETO BE RESEEDED AND ANY OTHER AREAS,DISTURBED OR DAMAGED, ARE TO BE RESTOREDAND REPAIRED TO PRE-CONSTRUCTIONCONDITIONS UPON THE COMPLETION OFCONSTRUCTION AND REMOVAL OF THETEMPORARY DRIVE.SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS FOREROSION CONTROL PRACTICES ATTEMPORARY ENTRANCE DRIVE.1CIVIL ENGINEERAnderson-Johnson Associates, Inc.Valley Square Office Center, Suite 2007575 Golden Valley RoadMinneapolis, Minnesota 55427Tel: (763) 544-7129Fax: (612) 544-0531STRUCTURAL ENGINEERBKBM Engineers, Inc.5930 Brooklyn BoulevardMinneapolis, Minnesota 55429-2518Tel: (763) 843-0420Fax: (763 843-0421MECHANICAL ENGINEERWold Architects and Engineers305 St. Peter StreetSt. Paul, Minnesota 55102Tel: (651) 227-7773Fax: (651) 223-5646ELECTRICAL ENGINEERWold Architects and Engineers305 St. Peter StreetSt. Paul, Minnesota 55102Tel: (651) 227-7773Fax: (651) 223-5646DateRegistration NumberScale:NorthCheck:Drawn:Date:Comm:I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared byme or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensedunder the laws of the State ofHGFEDCBA12345678109AMNAs indicated8/7/2013 1:01:41 PMC:\_Revit_Project_Files\132066(CENTRAL)_jwollensak.rvtA0.10MKJW7/22/13132066SITE ACCESS ANDCONSTRUCTIONLIMITS PLANMINNESOTA7/22/13Paul Aplikowski42737ARCHITECTIndependent SchoolDistrict #2836425 West 33rd StreetSt. Louis Park, MN 55426'6500 W 26th St.St. Louis Park, MN 55426132066Central: \\Minnesota\StPaul\ISD283\Peter Hobart\132066 2 ClassroomAddition\02_ARCH\Revit\132066(CENTRAL).rvtPeter Hobart Elementary- 2013 ClassroomAdditionRevisionsDescription Date NumAddendum 108/08/201310 1/32" = 1'-0"SITE ACCESS AND CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PLANG124' 48'City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4e) Title: Conditional Use Permit – “Peter Hobart Addition” (6500 West 26th Street)Page 10
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty Limited
Partnership and Dolce Living Investments, LLC
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Assignment and
Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty Limited Partnership and Dolce
Living Investments, LLC related to The West End project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council find that the Assignment and
Assumption of the Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty Limited Partnership and
Dolce Living Investments, LLC is in the best interest of the City and its residents?
SUMMARY:
The Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment of May 17, 2010 between the
EDA, the City, and Duke Realty LP (the "Redeveloper") provides that whenever the Redeveloper
wishes to convey any portion of the Redevelopment Property and assign its obligations under the
Contract to a third party, the EDA and City must review and formally approve the proposed
assignment. Duke is selling the former Chili’s and Olive Garden restaurant sites to Dolce Living
Investments. Dolce intends to redevelop both sites as residential use; however they recognize
they are acquiring the property without any guarantee they will gain zoning approval from the
City for their projects. Approval of the Assignment does not constitute approval of Dolce
Living’s proposed development(s) and in fact increases the City’s control over the development
of the subject site. Approval of the Assignment means that Dolce Living must comply with all
the obligations and conditions of the Redevelopment Contract applicable to this site including
limits on uses (no gun shops, etc.) and requirements for insurance, among other things. The
Redeveloper has provided a proposed Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
and has requested that the EDA and City provide written approval of the Assignment by
executing the Consent, Estoppel and Agreement attached to the Assignment.
The EDA’s legal counsel has reviewed the proposed Assignment and the attached Consent, and
recommends the EDA and City approve and consent to this document, which is substantially
similar to the previous Assignment documents approved by the City and EDA in the past.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Under the proposed Assignment and
Assumption Agreement, Dolce Living Investments, LLC assumes the financial obligations that
were to be incurred by Duke Realty under the Redevelopment Contract as it pertains to the
Redevelopment Property. All costs associated with this agreement are to be paid by Duke Realty.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Assignment & Assumption (See EDA Staff Report)
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
RESOLUTION NO. 13-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING AN ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION OF
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT BETWEEN DUKE REALTY LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP AND DOLCE LIVING INVESTMENTS, LLC
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council ("Council") of the City of St. Louis, Minnesota
("City") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“Authority”) is currently
administering its Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Project") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.001 to 469.047, and within the Project has established The West End Tax Increment Financing
District (“TIF District”).
1.02. The Authority, the City and Duke Realty Limited Partnership (the “Redeveloper”)
entered into an Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment Dated as of May 17,
2010 (the “Contract”), regarding redevelopment of a portion of the property within the TIF District.
1.03. The Redeveloper proposes to convey a portion of the property that is the subject of
the Contract (the “Subject Property”) to Dolce Living Investments, LLC (the “Assignee”), and the
Assignee is seeking to redevelop the Subject Property with housing.
1.04. In connection with such conveyance, Redeveloper seeks to assign certain obligations
of Redeveloper related to the Subject Property to the Assignee, and the Assignee agrees to accept
such obligations, all pursuant to an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
between Redeveloper and Assignee (the “Assignment”).
1.05. The Council has reviewed the Assignment and finds that the approval and execution
of the City’s consent thereto are in the best interest of the City and its residents.
Section 2. City Approval; Other Proceedings.
2.01. The Assignment, including the attached Consent, Estoppel and Agreement of the City
related thereto, as presented to the Council is hereby in all respects approved, subject to
modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the Mayor
and City Manager, provided that execution of the consent to the Assignment by such officials shall
be conclusive evidence of approval.
2.02. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City,
the Consent, Estoppel and Agreement attached to the Assignment and any other documents
requiring execution by the City in order to carry out the transaction described in the Assignment.
2.03. City staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to carry out
the intent of this resolution.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4f) Page 3
Title: Assignment & Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Duke Realty and Dolce Living
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission
April 17, 2013, 6:30 p.m. Meeting
Rec Center Programming Office
1. Call to Order
Mr. Hagemann, Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission members present: Jim Beneke, Sophia Flumerfelt,
George Foulkes, Sarah Foulkes, George Hagemann and Tom Worthington.
Commission members absent: Elizabeth Griffin and Kirk Hawkinson
Staff present: Rick Birno, Recreation Superintendent, Jason Eisold, The Rec Center Manager,
and Stacy Voelker, Recording Secretary.
2. Presentation: Friends of the Arts (Susan Schneck and George Hagemann)
Susan Schneck, Friends of the Arts Board Chair, along with the Commission, provided
introductions. Ms. Schneck thanked them for the invitation.
Ms. Schneck distributed an overview of the Friends of the Arts (FoTA), a nonprofit community
organization, to Commission members. FoTA is an advocate and support organization to
encourage creativity and expression. FoTA has a website and Facebook page. Members were
encouraged to review those for more information on FoTA.
The City has been very positive in responding to public art. They attempt to have a City
representative included in all public art meetings for various projects. Community Development
also invites a representative from FoTA for various committees as they negotiate public art with
developers throughout the City.
Ms. Schneck reviewed the programs through Friends of the Arts as follows:
Members were informed of the Arts for Life Scholarship program in which applications are
accepted and reviewed quarterly. This is a great program as people can do what they want to
do (i.e. music, theater, media, etc.).
The Arts and Culture Grant Program, which was established in 2006, is funded by the
city, advised Ms. Schneck. The Arts & Culture Grant Program funds projects that build
bridges between artists and communities showcase artists, to engage people in creative
learning experiences through the arts, and to provide opportunities to increase and promote
artistic production and cultural experiences.
The Our Town Program runs every other year. The program creates events that offer
audience participation and provides grant funding to assist. The initial program in 2008 was
Our Town: Faces and Places; followed in 2010 with Our Town: Versus and Voices, then in
2012 it was Our Town: Beats & Streets.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2013
Ms. Schneck indicated that their organization can provide fiscal responsibility to individuals that
are not 501c3 from grants since they are a 501c3 organization. They partner with businesses,
community organizations, etc. and have relationships throughout the community. FoTA enters an
agreement with individuals or organizations through applications. Through this process, FoTA
provides exposure for the artist in emails and resources in the community. The applicant reports
back to FoTA on finances as FoTA includes that information on their tax return. In return for
these services, FoTA receives 6% of the grant funding received.
Ms. Schneck indicated FoTA received $10,000 from the Met Regional Arts Council to work on
the direction of the FoTA organization. Mr. Worthington inquired on their strategic plan. Ms.
Schneck confirmed what is in place is good but lacks community engagement and exposure.
FoTA would like to increase their connection with other similar organizations in the City,
providing FoTA with more structure and sustainability.
Mr. Beneke inquired on Friends of the Arts involvement with the new community center
planning. Mr. Birno advised FoTA will become involved in the process as Council has indicated
they would like the new community center to be a unique structure with various architecture
elements.
Members thanked Ms. Schneck for her attendance and overview and Ms. Schneck thanked
Commission.
3. Approval of Minutes
a. February 20, 2012
It was moved by Commission member Foulkes to approve the minutes. Motion passed 6-0.
4. New Business
a. Louisiana Oaks Park Improvement Update (Rick Birno)
The Commission was informed by Mr. Birno of the public input meeting hosted
approximately one month ago. The project proposes adding lights on three of the soccer
fields, a picnic shelter on the trail, permanent bathroom, irrigation, a storm alert system,
and expanding the parking lot on north end of building. Three residents attended the
meeting and all were supportive of the project. The project was approved by Council and
is scheduled to begin in June. The funding for the project is from three different venues:
$200,000 from the Hennepin County Facility Grant program, $200,000 from the Park
Improvement fund and $15,000 from the Soccer Association.
b. Aquatic Park / Rec Center Report (Jason Eisold)
Mr. Eisold advised the Commission the revenue netted (revenue versus expense) in 2012
was the highest compared to the last three years. The Aquatic Park was open all days of
the season except one. The Aquatic Park netted $86,000 with just over 70,000 visitors in
2012. This year some of the changes that will be made are changing out the pumps,
recoat/repaint the mushrooms and continue to utilize the Sphagnum Moss.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4g) Page 3
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2013
The Aquatic Park currently has eight days that are full with group reservations for 2013.
As the Aquatic Park ages, the City will hire a consultant to review the Park. In 2014
shade structure has been proposed to be added in the sand/water play area. The
Commission will be informed of consultant discussions.
Mr. Beneke inquired if any new items will be added to the Aquatic Park. Mr. Birno
indicated no new items will be added until the outcome of the new community center is
known. Once that is known, staff will have a better direction on what to do with the
Aquatic Park.
Ice Time sold in 2013, Mr. Eisold indicated, has increased by 600 hours compared to
2012. The East Arena has been repainted, the rooms will be repainted, and the ice in the
East Arena will be back in by the end of April. Staff is working with a consultant on
changing out two operating systems into one system which would save a considerable
amount of expenses. Mr. Birno will provide details to the Commission as they are
received. Staff is also researching the replacement of the cooling tower on the north end
of the building, indicated Mr. Birno. Other community centers are doing the same thing
due to the age of the equipment.
Mr. Beneke inquired on the savings from utilizing Sphagnum Moss. The cost savings is
minimal, Mr. Eisold advised, but the quality of the water is the largest benefit. The moss
provides a lack of skin irritation in the water and the water doesn’t smell like chlorine as
the Moss is a natural chemical.
Mr. Hagemann suggested advertising the benefits of utilizing the moss. Mr. Birno
indicated it is used at the Oak Hill Splash Pad also.
New, up-to-date fixtures and shower stall inserts are being installed in the women’s
locker room, Mr. Eisold advised. Once completely, the same will be done in the men’s
locker room.
c. Environment and Sustainability Commission (Stacy Voelker)
Ms. Voelker advised the Commission a Task Force was created to research the need for a
commission that reviews and studies environmental and sustainability items. The Task
Force recommended adding a 13 member Commission to the Council in which the
Council approved. The Commission will be made up of eight regular resident members,
two business members, a resident tenant member and two youth members. They will
advise the City Council on sustainability issues and serve as a conduit between residents
and the public. Interested individuals must complete an application to be appointed by the
City Council.
d. Minnehaha Creek Clean Up Reminder (Stacy Voelker)
Ms. Voelker reminded the Commission to meet by Brehmer Bank (by Knollwood Mall)
on Saturday, April 27 at 8:45 a.m. An instruction sheet was distributed and all members
advisee they will be attending. Ms. Voelker will provide Mr. Vaughan with the list of
members attending and he will then create groups for members to lead.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4g) Page 4
Title: Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting Minutes of April 17, 2013
5. Old Business
a. Community Center Process (Rick Birno)
Mr. Birno advised staff held their first meeting with HGA, Inc., the architect hired to
assist in site evaluation and planning for the new community center. Staff and HGA
representatives reviewed the steps and discussions submitted by the Task Force.
Discussions included gathering space needs, and SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats). The group would like to review what Eagan, Eden Prairie,
Andover and Chaska have in their community centers and how their multi-use facilities
work. The process is in the initial stage. Staff will check-in with the City Council in May
and the goal is to have a formal recommendation, with designs for two or three sites, in
July. Members and staff briefly discussed logistics of the new community center. Mr.
Foulkes suggested the Silver Sneaker program as it is a great program for seniors. It
provides transportation to certain fitness facilities, in which the new community center
may be one of them.
Staff will continue to review the process with the Commission.
6. Staff Reports (Rick Birno / Jason Eisold / Stacy Voelker)
Mr. Birno and Ms. Voelker provided a brief overview and outcome of organization changes in
the City which created the Operations and Recreation Department. The Public Works
Department and Parks and Recreation Department merged to create the Operations and
Recreation Department. Engineering is a department of its own. Commission members viewed
the organization charts for Operations and Recreation plus Engineering Departments. The
structure was briefly discussed.
The Derrick Keller scoreboard has been delivered and staff is waiting for frost to leave the
ground so the scoreboard can be installed. The baseball schedule is currently unknown due to the
weather. The Commission members will be advised when the ribbon cutting for the scoreboard
will occur.
7. Other / Future Agenda Items
a. Member Comments
Mr. Hagemann passed along a compliment to Mr. Eisold for hosting the figure skating
competition recently. He indicated it is a great variety for the facility.
8. Adjournment
It was moved by Commission member Worthington to adjourn at 8:01 p.m. The motion passed 6-0.
Respectfully submitted,
Stacy Voelker
Stacy Voelker
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4h
OFFICIAL 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.
2. Approval of Minutes of June 5, 2013
Commissioner Kramer moved approval of the minutes of June 5, 2013. Vice-Chair
Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 2-0 (Commissioners
Carper and Johnston-Madison abstained.) Commissioner Person arrived at 6:02 p.m.
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.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 26, 2013
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.
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.
B. Zoning Text Amendment – Parking Uses
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 13-22-ZA
Mr. Morrison stated that the purpose of the amendment is to clarify what types of parking
uses are allowed in the City, in which districts they are permitted, and conditions
associated with them. He displayed a table summarizing all the proposed changes.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about parking lots in R-1, R-2, and R-3 Districts.
Mr. Morrison responded that parking lots would be allowed with conditions in the R-1,
R-2 and R-3 Districts. He said currently several parking lots exist in those zoning
districts, mostly the result of tax forfeit properties from the 1960s. They have either
become additional parking for commercial businesses that don’t have sufficient parking
or they have become park and rides. They are all being used. Rather than leave them as
non-conforming uses, they would be permitted with conditions.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she’d rather see the properties stay non-
conforming. She is concerned about going forward if a house was removed for any
reason or attached to a commercial property.
Vice-Chair Morris commented that the use could be converted later.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she is looking at it from the perspective of a
neighborhood which abuts commercial properties, such as the residential neighborhood
behind Miracle Mile.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4h) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 26, 2013
Mr. Morrison said as proposed in the ordinance, someone could acquire a home in an R-1
Zoning District and convert it to a parking lot for additional parking for a business. He
said it has not been requested in the 10 years he has been with the City. Staff reviewed
this possibility and determined it could be handled administratively rather than through
the CUP process.
Vice-Chair Morris said he didn’t foresee any commercial properties acquiring a
residential property and converting it to business parking without having to rezone the
lot.
Mr. Morrison said the non-conforming lots can continue to exist as non-conforming uses,
repaired and maintained and replaced. They cannot be expanded.
Vice-Chair Morris opened the public hearing.
Alberto Bertomeu, owner of several St. Louis Park properties, said he suggested that the
free market decide the best uses for properties. He said there are many small businesses
along Excelsior Blvd. that cannot be developed as they have no parking. He stated there
are very stringent regulations on parking in St. Louis Park. The City needs to decide if
Excelsior Blvd. should be a residential boulevard or a commercial avenue. He said the
city should let the business owners invest and buy land. He gave the example of a
property he recently acquired which abuts residential land he would have liked to use for
parking.
Vice-Chair Morris closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she understands the concerns of Mr. Bertomeu and
other small business owners. She said the parking lot he would have been interested in
developing would have been right in the middle of a residential area.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to recommend approval of the Zoning
Ordinance Amendment pertaining to Parking Uses except for parking lots as a principal
use PC Permitted with Conditions in the R-1, R-2 and R-3 Districts, which should be
deleted.
Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion.
Commissioner Person asked if those three items were deleted and a lot was purchased,
would the only recourse be a rezoning?
Mr. Morrison stated that the recourse would be to go through a Comprehensive Plan
Land Use change and a rezoning.
The motion passed on a vote of 4-1 (Person opposed).
4. Other Business
5. Communications
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4h) Page 4
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes June 26, 2013
A. Commissioner Carper recommended future consideration by the Planning Dept.
for the City to use LED lighting on City property and parks and for LED lighting
to be required in parking lots of any new development.
B. Sean Walther, Senior Planner, spoke about the Louisiana Station Area Advisory
Committee. He said Commissioner Kramer has agreed to participate on behalf
of the Planning Commission. It’s anticipated that the group will meet through
November. Outcomes from that group will probably be brought to a Planning
Commission study session.
C. Mr. Walther briefly discussed a development interest for the former Chili’s
restaurant site at the West End. A concept plan was provided to the
commissioners.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells, Adm. Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Consent Agenda Item: 4i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Vendor Claims
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing Vendor Claims for the period July
26, 2013 through August 9, 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
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
390.00COMM & MARKETING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT3CMA
390.00
2,023.00SKATEBOARD PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES3RD LAIR SKATEPARK
2,023.00
295.00SPECIAL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES4 ACE PRODUCTIONS
295.00
74.76GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYA-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC
68.36STORM CLEAN UP GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,735.66TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,878.78
1,201.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESABRAKADOODLE
1,201.00
399.54GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYACTION FLEET INC
399.54
2,625.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESAE2S
2,625.00
5,500.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWAHRENDT, RYAN & ELIZABETH
5,500.00
39.46OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAIRGAS NORTH CENTRAL
39.46
20,000.00ESCROWSGENERALAKARE COMPANIES LLC
20,000.00
1,983.50FACILITIES MCTE G & A WATER SERVICEALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC
1,983.50
358.61GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYAMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS
358.61
318.14OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONSANCOM TECHNICAL CENTER
318.14
678.83INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESANDERSEN INC, EARL
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 2
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
678.83
231.25NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESANDERSON, TRACY
231.25
598.50SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk GENERAL SUPPLIESAQUA LOGIC INC
598.50
10,225.17WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEAUTOMATIC SYSTEMS INC
58,889.96WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT
69,115.13
65.79GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEAUTOMOBILE SERVICE
65.79
402.44CABLE TV G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENTAVI SYSTEMS INC
402.44
1,646.59TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENTBACHMANS
324.02REFORESTATIONLANDSCAPING MATERIALS
1,970.61
1,310.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESBARR ENGINEERING CO
1,310.00
14,050.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESBASICH INC, MICHAEL
14,050.00
75.28-SEWER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSBATTCHER & AERO ELECTRICAL CON
1,170.28SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,095.00
81.66WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESBATTERIES PLUS
81.66
323.61NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBERSCHEID, GARY
323.61
132.00INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDINGBIOTA LLC
132.00
125.43ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARBIRNO, RICK
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 3
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
3Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
125.43
8,561.26-CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S RETAINED PERCENTAGEBLACK & DEW LLC
171,225.23MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
162,663.97
450.002012A GO HIA DEBT SERV G&A FISCAL AGENT FEESBOND TRUST SERVICES CORP
450.002010D FIRE STAT DEBT SERV G&A FISCAL AGENT FEES
450.00LA CRT 2010C DEBT SERV G&A FISCAL AGENT FEES
1,350.00
90.84GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYBOYER TRUCK PARTS
90.84
714.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBRIGGS, AMY
714.00
5,500.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTBRIMEYER FURSMAN
5,500.00
91.72REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBROTHEN, MARK
91.72
585.51GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEC&E AUTO UPHOLSTERY
585.51
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWCALDWELL, PAULA & RONALD
1,000.00
34.24-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCARDIAC SCIENCE INC
532.24OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
498.00
1,190.59IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE
1,190.59
312.35EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESCBIZ FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS INC
312.35
2,076.98TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTCDW GOVERNMENT INC
2,076.98
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 4
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
4Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
2,153.81DISCOUNT LOAN PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCEE HOUSING SOLUTIONS LLC
1,050.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
19,350.00TRANSFORMATION LOAN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
22,553.81
462.82FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN
8,838.61ENTERPRISE G & A HEATING GAS
9,301.43
1,891.69PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCENTRAL WOOD PRODUCTS
1,891.69
33.43FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESCINTAS CORPORATION
172.20FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
56.75AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
56.75AQUATIC PARK BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
285.33VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
604.46
6.55GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK
334.69-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
57.03ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
66.00ADMINISTRATION G & A POSTAGE
377.80ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
232.43ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE
250.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT
29.95HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
100.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
25.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING
57.43HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE
340.99COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING
546.29IT G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
836.46IT G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
101.52IT G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5.70IT G & A POSTAGE
397.80IT G & A TRAINING
46.00POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGE
64.13ASSESSING G & A TRAINING
19.30FINANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
505.00FINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
683.50GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
19.21POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 5
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
5Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
12.36POLICE G & A POSTAGE
658.32POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS
131.98POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE
188.95OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
129.48OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES
784.94OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
424.25OPERATIONSTRAINING
192.06ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
32.16ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
86.03LIASON/COORDINATION GENERAL SUPPLIES
2.30-CABLE TV BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
70.03TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
24.65STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
139.09CE INSPECTION GENERAL SUPPLIES
138.00-ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
55.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
25.00ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING
1,117.66PLAYGROUNDSGENERAL SUPPLIES
682.95SUMMER FIELDTRIPS GENERAL SUPPLIES
213.48YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES
69.66PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
100.78PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
70.95WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
115.86JUNIOR NATURALISTS GENERAL SUPPLIES
64.30REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,053.08AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
61.45AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
27.81AQUATIC PARK G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,885.00LIFEGUARDINGOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
2,147.45CONCESSIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
5.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGE
19.30PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
55.64GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
28.14ADMINISTRATIVE ACQUIS/DISPOSAL POSTAGE
14,965.91
2,078.17CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIESCOCA-COLA BOTTLING CO
2,078.17
170.61IT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONSCOMCAST
170.61
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 6
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
6Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
286.15TV PRODUCTION GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESCOMCAST CABLE
286.15
115.93PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESCOMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY
115.93
221.57INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESCONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS
221.57
455.00ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECOOL AIR MECHANICAL INC
455.00
733.41NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC
733.41
709.30NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIA
709.30
83.51ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARCROSSFIELD, JANELLE
83.51
182.88POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIESCUB FOODS
182.88
637.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCURRAN-MOORE, KIM
637.50
370.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYD&R ELECTRONICS
370.00
1,469.82REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIESDALCO ENTERPRISES INC
1,469.82
190.72PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESDEKO FACTORY SERVICE INC
190.72
5,050.71GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYDEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES
5,050.71
35,000.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIDJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC
1,572.19PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
465.00ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 7
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
7Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
37,037.19
1,586.00POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC
1,586.00
54.51WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESDON'S RODENTS
54.51
3.14-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSDOUGLAS INDUSTRIES INC
48.81PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
45.67
262.93INSPECTIONS G & A TRAININGDUBE, JIM
262.93
54,097.65GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGEDYNAMIC ELECTRIC LLC
21,911.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
76,008.65
635.47SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESEGAN COMPANIES INC
635.47
168.75ESCROWSEHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC
168.75
165.00SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEELECTRIC PUMP INC
165.00
97.30POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGSELLANSON, LUKE
97.30
105.43GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYEMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE
105.43
127.18GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYEMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOG
127.18
2,088.62PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESENVIROBATE METRO
2,088.62
396.50ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESENVIROTECH SERVICES INC
396.50
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 8
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
8Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
36,585.64SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS RECYCLING SERVICEEUREKA RECYCLING
36,585.64
450.00RIGHT-OF-WAY GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESEVERGREEN LAND SERVICES CO
450.00
663.72GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO
663.72
384.87REC CENTER BUILDING MOTOR FUELSFERRELLGAS
384.87
118.95GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESFILTRATION SYSTEMS INC
118.95
401.73OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLSFIRE EQUIPMENT SPECIALTIES INC
401.73
32.77WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARFITZGERALD, LAUREN
32.77
60,350.11GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGEFRATTALONE COMPANIES INC
5,088.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A LAND
7,049.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
72,487.11
71,712.21UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSGARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC
4,452.86REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
76,165.07
16.71-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSGENERAL PARTS INC
259.71AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
243.00
297.50UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSGLEWWE DOORS INC
297.50
198.46GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESGRAINGER INC, WW
84.07BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
282.53
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 9
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
9Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
390.00UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSGRANITE LEDGE ELECTRICAL CONTR
390.00
322,705.73PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIGRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO
322,705.73
865.66WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGREEN HORIZONS
865.66
3,925.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGEGREENWORKS LANDSCAPE CONTRACTI
7,590.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A LAND
11,515.00
3,880.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGROTH SEWER & WATER
3,880.00
450.24EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCEGROUP HEALTH INC - WORKSITE
450.24
6,356.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHALL CO, W L
6,356.00
918.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHAMILTON, MIKE
918.00
13,370.39PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHAMMEL GREEN & ABRAHAMSON INC
13,370.39
96.00PICNIC SHELTERS RENT REVENUEHANSEN, SALLY
96.00
158.77POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGSHARCEY, MICHAEL
158.77
10,420.97WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESHAWKINS INC
162.04-ARENA MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
4,548.05BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,498.50AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
16,305.48
1,086.92PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESHCI CHEMTEC INC
1,086.92
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 10
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
10Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
525.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENDERSON, TRACY
525.00
26,905.06GENERAL FUND G&A MISC EXPENSEHENNEPIN COUNTY
1,255.50HIA ADMIN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,020.10SPEC ASSMT CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1,990.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
31,170.66
825.20OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONSHENNEPIN COUNTY INFO TECH
256.00OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
1,081.20
2,223.52WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
2,223.52SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
4,447.04STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
8,894.08PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
17,788.16
1,410.60GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHILL CO, ROBERT B
1,410.60
42.20WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESHIRSHFIELDS
42.20
90.00PICNIC SHELTERS RENT REVENUEHOLY FAMILY SCHOOL
90.00
220.00INSPECTIONS G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCEHOLZER & NATASHA BONACCI, TODD
220.00
815.29UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSHOM FURNITURE
815.29
78.14GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
17.06ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
11.22ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
737.07WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
80.41WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
17.37PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
4.89IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 11
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
11Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
15.34PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
10.66BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
44.86BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS
1,017.02
73.35REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOPE, BRUCE & ANNE
73.35
458.70GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEHOPKINS AUTO BODY INC
458.70
69.00YOUTH PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOPKINS-MINNETONKA RECREATION
69.00
100.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JEFFREY
306.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
406.00
220.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JENNIFER
150.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
370.00
150.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JESSICA
175.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
325.00
150.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, KRISTINE
357.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
507.00
78.64REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHU, MICHELE
78.64
1,632.55EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESI.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49
1,632.55
890.00JAG GRANT 2010 SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATIACP
890.00
13,030.31WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEIDEAL SERVICE INC
13,030.31
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 12
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
12Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
252.86WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEINDELCO
101.92AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
354.78
1,154.24PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESINDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO
865.68STORM CLEAN UP OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
2,019.92
2,470.79IT G & A TELEPHONEINTEGRA TELECOM
2,470.79
668.49GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYINVER GROVE FORD
3,096.86GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
5,026.59WORK FOR OTHERS (NON-DEPT)EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
8,791.94
38.58GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYI-STATE TRUCK CENTER
38.58
41.70INSPECTIONS G & A TRAININGJASMER, JERRY
41.70
12.95GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYJERRY'S HARDWARE
43.90ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS
8.71INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
377.77SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
43.25PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
11.05GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
497.63
2,300.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTJOBSINMINNEAPOLIS.COM
2,300.00
740.78IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESJOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES/LESCO
740.78
69.17WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESJOHNSON, ROGER
69.17
77.77REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESJORGESON, ESTATE OF MARIAN
77.77
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 13
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
13Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
165.55PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYKATH FUEL OIL SERVICE
165.55
1,056.92EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSKELLER, JASMINE Z
1,056.92
2.65COMM DEV PLANNING G & A MEETING EXPENSEKELLEY, RYAN
16.33COMM DEV PLANNING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
18.98
68.50REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKENNEDY, BEVERLY
68.50
2,638.10WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIKEYS WELL DRILLING CO
2,638.10
2,790.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKIDCREATE STUDIO
2,790.00
116.80TENNISOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKIDS TEAM TENNIS LLC
116.80
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWKORTH, JOSHUA
1,000.00
130.02GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYKOVATCH MOBILE EQUIPMENT CORP
8.36-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
121.66
1,382.77ARENA MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESKRISS PREMIUM PRODUCTS INC
1,382.77
255.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKUBES, JON
255.00
16.64PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESLAKES GAS CO
16.64
213.60GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESLARSON, JH CO
272.72PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
204.54BRICK HOUSE (1324)GENERAL SUPPLIES
690.86
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 14
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
14Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,880.00TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENTLAUREL TREE FARMS
1,880.00
2,295.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESLAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES
2,295.00
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWLAWRENCE, GREG
1,000.00
439.00FINANCE G & A BLDG & CONTENTS INSURANCELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE
250.00UNINSURED LOSS B/S PREPAID EXPENSES
48,699.00UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS
49,388.00
122.00HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESLEXIS NEXIS OCC HEALTH SOLUTIO
122.00
288.40GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYLIND ELECTRONICS INC
288.40
8,622.10REILLY BUDGET GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESLOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP
8,532.10REILLY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
17,154.20
359.90GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESLOEFFLER SHOES
759.75INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,119.65
41,953.00IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESLOGIS
3,133.22TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
45,086.22
5,185.23GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYLUBE-TECH ESI
5,185.23
120.04GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYMACQUEEN EQUIP CO
120.04
569.04WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICEMANAGED SERVICES INC
569.04
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 15
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
15Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
80.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEMARCO CO INC
80.00
17.95-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSMARSARS WATER RESCUE SYSTEMS I
279.00OPERATIONSTRAINING
261.05
1,389.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTMASTER TECHNOLOGY GROUP
1,389.00
5,000.00DIAL-A-RIDE PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMAXFIELD RESEARCH INC
5,000.00
1,000.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMCCHESNEY, CHARLIE
1,000.00
117,491.64-STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGEMCCROSSAN INC, C S
2,349,832.83CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
2,232,341.19
26.70ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESMENARDS
92.62PAINTINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
147.71WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
267.03
7,552.87SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSMETHODIST HOSPITAL
7,552.87
175.00POLICE G & A TRAININGMETRO CISM TEAM
175.00
1,543.52EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT FIRE EQUIPMENTMETRO FIRE INC
1,543.52
76,113.24GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYMIDWAY FORD
76,113.24
552.88ENGINEERING G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESMIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO
552.88
1,858.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMIDWEST TESTING LLC
1,858.00
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 16
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
16Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
549.90PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT
549.90
117.96EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITSMINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC
117.96
867.79OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESMINNESOTA CONWAY
867.79
64.00WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSESMINNESOTA DEPT HEALTH
64.00
16.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITSMINNESOTA NCPERS LIFE INS
16.00
450.00WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATMINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOC
450.00
50.00OAK HILL SPLASH PAD PROGRAM REVENUEMINNETONKA EXPLORERS CLUB
50.00
78.24REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMOZEY, WILLIAM
78.24
4,000.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A LANDMPCA
1,250.00PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5,250.00
320.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMRPA
320.00
294.78GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYMTI DISTRIBUTING CO
294.78
257.00REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMVTL LABORATORIES
257.00
34,655.05GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS BAL S RETAINED PERCENTAGENAC MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL SE
1,591.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
36,246.05
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 17
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
17Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
2,529.99GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)
83.34RELAMPINGGENERAL SUPPLIES
16.01PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
14.69GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
2,644.03
1,450.00GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICENATL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER CO
1,450.00
337.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESNELSON, KEITH
337.50
7,541.53CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENTNEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
7,541.53
159.95PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESNOKOMIS SHOE SHOP
159.95
15.99SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk GENERAL SUPPLIESNORTHERN AIRE SWIMMING POOLS
34.86AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES
50.85
1,837.45GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYNORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC
1,837.45
25.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAININGNORTHSTAR CHAPTER APA
25.00
70.54ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
16.82HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES
224.37POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
65.94OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES
193.88INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
417.88ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
989.43
1,717.56INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESOFFICE TEAM
1,717.56
260.52GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESOLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC
260.52
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 18
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
18Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
11.80-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSOMAHA PAPER COMPANY INC
183.48PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
171.68
5,145.51PORTABLE TOILETS/FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESON SITE SANITATION
288.58OPENOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
104.74OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
138.94WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,677.77
13.94GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYO'REILLY AUTO PARTS
13.94
260.00GROUP ADMISSION PROGRAM REVENUEOSSEO AREA SCHOOLS
260.00
76.51GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYPARK JEEP
76.51
872.00SKATE RENTAL PROGRAM REVENUEPARK PRO SHOP
701.00SKATE SHARPENING PROGRAM REVENUE
1,573.00
43.93-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSPBBS EQUIPMENT CORP
682.93REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
639.00
1,923.71COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGPERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC
1,923.71
7.50PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESPETTY CASH
46.16WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
12.65WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
46.00WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES
22.52SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
15.38SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
10.00SOLID WASTE G&A MEETING EXPENSE
32.18PARK AND REC G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
6.36PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
56.40VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MEETING EXPENSE
48.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES
303.15
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 19
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
19Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
72.00GROUP ADMISSION PROGRAM REVENUEPLAYWORKS
72.00
2,888.78GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYPOMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC
2,888.78
160.91WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESPOWDER COATING TECHNOLOGIES
160.91
32.11-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSPRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC
50.80-STORM WATER UTILITY BAL SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
789.73STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
499.21INVASIVE PLANT MGMT/RESTORATIO OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,206.03
26,400.00TREE MAINTENANCE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEPRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE
26,400.00
19.78COMM & MARKETING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARPRIBBENOW, NICOLE
19.78
180.00ARENA MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEPRINTERS SERVICE INC
180.00
5,266.71WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEQ3 CONTRACTING
514.50SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
699.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
6,480.21
48.26VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGEQUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER
48.26
627.56TREE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRAINBOW TREECARE
627.56
3,002.75FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICERANDY'S SANITATION INC
1,227.68REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
988.00SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
416.86SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
5,635.29
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 20
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
20Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
83.10POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESREGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS LLC
83.10
317.42STORM CLEAN UP OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESREINDERS INC
317.42
14,336.59IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICERICOH USA INC
14,336.59
619.69GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYRIGID HITCH INC
619.69
315.00SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEROOT-O-MATIC
315.00
30.72-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSS & S WORLDWIDE INC
477.61PLAYGROUNDSOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
446.89
340.00FACILITY ROOM RENTAL RENT REVENUESABES JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
340.00
31.28OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIESSAM'S CLUB
138.39SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL SUPPLIES
24.53SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES
142.46STORM CLEAN UP CONCESSION SUPPLIES
40.61WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
5,216.29CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIES
615.24PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE CONCESSION SUPPLIES
6,208.80
150.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSANSBY, SCOTT
150.00
20.00POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSAVAGE POLICE DEPARTMENT
20.00NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
40.00
36.34PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO.
36.34
403.22EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONSCHLEGEL, EVA
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 21
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
21Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
403.22
171.19ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARSCHOMER, KELLEY
171.19
400.00ERUOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSCOTT COUNTY TREASURER
400.00
49,874.06PE DESIGN GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESSEH
49,874.06
57.01SUPPORT SERVICES G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESIDEKICK
57.01
303.42AQUATIC PARK BUDGET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESIGNATURE AQUATICS
303.42
26,452.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC
26,452.00
476.00GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSIMPLEXGRINNELL LP
654.50REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,130.50
101.61NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSKELLY, ANGELA
101.61
1,458.60EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESSLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993
1,458.60
966.92GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICESONUS INTERIORS INC
966.92
2,070.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWSPEARS, TOM
2,070.00
26,501.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISPORTS TECHNOLOGY INC
26,501.00
1,399.92IT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONSSPRINT
1,399.92
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 22
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
22Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
900.00ESCROWSGENERALSRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
900.00
16.00GROUP ADMISSION PROGRAM REVENUEST DAVID'S CENTER
16.00
263.75DAILY ADMISSION PROGRAM REVENUEST LOUIS PARK LIONS
263.75
1,225.62PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESST PAUL, CITY OF
1,225.62
2,082.50UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSSTONEBROOKE EQUIPMENT INC
2,082.50
347.30GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYSTREICHER'S
256.43OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
603.73
10,886.95PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC
21,222.32REILLY BUDGET GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
32,109.27
58.46ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS
58.46
54.18ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTELELANGUAGE INC
54.18
296.59REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICETENNANT SALES AND SERVICE CO.
296.59
104.06BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICETERMINIX INT
104.06
52.80-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSTHYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR
820.82REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
768.02
91.73TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESTITAN MACHINERY
91.73
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 23
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
23Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
8,345.00PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC
8,345.00
93.52RELAMPINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESTRAFFIC CONTROL CORP
93.52
127.50SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAUTMANN, JOHN
204.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
331.50
10,695.00REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTREE TRUST
10,695.00
3,715.01GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYTRI STATE BOBCAT
3,715.01
748.39GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYTURFWERKS
748.39
65.46REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTWEETEN, JOEL
65.46
157.29GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICETWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO
157.29
8,294.75TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENTUHL CO INC
8,294.75
300.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSUNITED STATES TREASURY
300.00
418.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA
418.00
120.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESUNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS
120.00
2,262.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTUS HEALTH WORKS MEDICAL GROUP
2,262.00
6,612.10-STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGEVALLEY PAVING INC
132,241.98CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 24
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
24Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
125,629.88
37,295.71WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEVALLEY-RICH CO INC
37,295.71
72.41REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESVAN DIEST, ANN
72.41
50.08SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEVERIZON WIRELESS
2,154.39CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT
2,204.47
25,074.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYWALSER BUICK PONTIAC GMC
25,074.00
1,630.58WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEWARNER'S OUTDOOR SOLUTIONS
1,630.58
5,305.37SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS MOTOR FUELSWASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN
62,373.00SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
26,049.90SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE
36,855.52SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
26,203.05SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE
156,786.84
278.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEWATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC
278.00
5,422.92CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIESWATSON CO INC
5,422.92
2,610.92-SEWER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET RETAINED PERCENTAGEWEBER ELECTRIC
52,218.45CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
49,607.53
845.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICEWHEELER HARDWARE
845.00
197.08VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESWIPERS & WIPES INC
197.08
416.81GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESWRAP CITY GRAPHICS
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 25
8/15/2013CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:44:29R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
25Page -Council Check Summary
8/9/2013 -7/26/2013
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
220.00TENNISGENERAL SUPPLIES
870.13REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,506.94
24.75OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESSXCEL ENERGY
29,315.15PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
30,422.97WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
2,088.42REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE
4,028.42SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
4,052.72STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
6,337.51PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
76,269.94
25,582.18GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYYOCUM OIL CO INC
25,582.18
380.55PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESZACKS INC
380.55
3,800.48SWEEPINGEQUIPMENT PARTSZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC
3,800.48
800.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORYZIEBART OF MINNESOTA INC
800.00
327.78COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGZIP PRINTING
327.78
Report Totals 4,440,344.70
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 4i)
Title: Vendor Claims Page 26
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Declaring Results of the Municipal
Primary Election held August 13, 2013.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None
SUMMARY: Minnesota Statutes 205.065 sub. 5 states the canvassing of municipal primary
election results must be conducted on either the second or third day after the primary. City
Charter Section 4.08 requires the City Council to meet and canvass election returns within seven
days of any regular or special election and declare the results as soon as possible.
As required by Charter, the Resolution includes:
• Total number of good ballots cast
• Total number of spoiled or defective ballots
• The vote for each candidate with a declaration of those who were elected
• A true copy of the ballots used
• The names of the judges and clerks of election
• Such other information as may seem pertinent
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Election expenses are included in the
adopted 2013 budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community through recruitment and training of community members to serve as Election Judges.
Attachments: Resolution
True Copy of Precinct Ballots
Election Precinct Results
Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Subject: Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
RESOLUTION NO. 13 -____
RESOLUTION CANVASSING ELECTION RETURNS OF
ST. LOUIS PARK – AUGUST 13, 2013
MUNICIPAL PRIMARY ELECTION
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Charter Section 4.08, the City Council shall meet and
canvass election returns within seven days of any election and shall declare the results as soon as
possible; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 205.065 sub. 5 states the canvassing
of municipal primary election results must be conducted on either the second or third day after
the primary; and
WHEREAS, the results prepared and certified to by the election judges have been
presented in summary form to the City Council for inspection,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council as follows:
1. The August 13, 2013 election returns having been canvassed, the votes received by each
candidate for city offices are as follows:
CITY OFFICE
Councilmember WARD 3
TOTAL
VOTES
Gregg Lindberg 191
Sue Santa 178
Kandi S. Arries 80
2. The number of spoiled ballots, the number of persons registered prior to the election and on
Election Day, the number of voter receipts, the number of absentee ballots, and the total
number of good votes cast in the city are as follows:
SPOILED BALLOTS 6
REGISTERED AT 7 A.M. 7,326
REGISTERED AT THE POLLS 8
TOTAL REGISTERED VOTERS 7,334
VOTER RECEIPTS 393
ABSENTEE BALLOTS 56
TOTAL VOTERS 449
(Percent Voting) (6%)
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Subject: Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
3. The Clerk and Judges of the election were as follows:
Nancy J. Stroth, City Clerk
Kay Midura, Election Official
Debbie Fischer, Election Official
WARD 3 Election Judges
3-9, Prince of Peace Lutheran Church 3-11, St. Louis Park Senior High School
William Tape, Chair Judith Serrell, Chair
Kimball Justesen, Co-Chair Janet Benson, Co-Chair
David Brehmer Mary Hendrix
Kay Drache Julie Ann Manuel
Barb Ruhl Ernest Tursich
Jilla Nadimi
3-12, Aquila Elementary School
3-10, Lenox Community Center Ken Huiras, Chair
Judy Shapiro, Chair Kevin Marsh, Co-Chair
Martin Lee, Co-Chair Mary Lou Christensen
Mary Wickersham Angela Fischels
Margaret Marek Jami LaPray
Mary Maynard
Absentee Ballot Board Judges
Melonie Danovsky
Josephine Jacobs
4. True copies of the ballots are attached.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the
following nominees are certified as the candidates for Ward 3 on the general election ballot:
Councilmember Ward 3
Candidates
Gregg Lindberg
Sue Santa
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 19,
2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Subject: Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
PRECINCT 9
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Subject: Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
PRECINCT 10
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Subject: Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
PRECINCT 11
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 7
Subject: Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
PRECINCT 12
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8a) Page 8
Subject: Canvass Results of Municipal Primary Election Held on August 13, 2013
City of St. Louis Park UNOFFICIAL RESULTS
Local Primary Election August 13, 2013
Total % of
Votes Vote Total 9 10 11 12
Councilmember Ward 3
Kandi S. Arries 80 17.8% 80 11 3 53 13
Gregg Lindberg 191 42.5% 191 40 25 51 75
Sue Santa 178 39.6% 178 63 35 25 55
449
SPOILED BALLOTS 6 6 3 0 1 2
REGISTERED AT 7 A.M.7,326 7,326 1,711 1,625 1,482 2,508
REG AT THE POLLS 8 8 1 1 3 3
TOTAL REGISTERED 7,334 7,334 1,712 1,626 1,485 2,511
VOTER RECEIPTS 393 393 86 58 122 127
ABSENTEE BALLOTS 56 56 28 5 7 16
(AB Precent Voting)14%14% 33% 9% 6% 13%
TOTAL VOTERS 449 449 114 63 129 143
(PERCENT VOTING)6%6% 7% 4% 9% 6%
WARD THREECITY OFFICES
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 8b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Resolution Confirming Appointment of Debra Heiser to the Position of Engineering
Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution confirming the appointment of
Debra Heiser to the position of Engineering Director.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: With the resignation of Mike Rardin, a vacancy has been created in the position
of Engineering Director. Following an extensive recruitment and selection process, the City
Manager has selected Debra Heiser to fill this position.
The City’s Engineering Director provides leadership and direction for all engineering matters for
the City. This position is key to the success of many long term projects that improve the quality
of life for residents, businesses and guests of our City. The Engineering Director will work
closely with all departments to ensure coordination and collaboration in planning and
development as well as upgrades and regular maintenance of our infrastructure. The City
Manager works closely with the Engineering Director as part of the management team.
Most recently, Ms. Heiser has been the City Engineer/Assistant Public Works Director for the
City of Roseville. She brings extensive experience along with her education and ongoing
professional development. In addition to Roseville, she has worked for the City of Burnsville in
various positions in the engineering and project management areas. The City of St. Louis Park
will be fortunate to have her bring her many talents and abilities to our community. The City
Manager is working with Ms. Heiser on her September start date with the City.
City Charter Section 5.04: Powers and Duties of the City Manager, states that with the consent of
the Council, the City Manager may appoint all department heads and other officers of the City.
At this time, the City Manager is seeking confirmation from the Council of the appointment of
Debra Heiser as Engineering Director.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
Title: Resolution Confirming Appointment of Debra Heiser to the Position of Engineering Director
RESOLUTION NO. 13-___
RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
CONFIRMING THE APPOINTMENT OF DEBRA HEISER
TO THE POSITION OF ENGINEERING DIRECTOR
WHEREAS, St. Louis Park City Charter Section 5.04 grants authority to the City Manager
to control and direct the administration of the City’s affairs and to appoint, with the consent of
the Council, all Department Heads; and
WHEREAS, the resignation of Mike Rardin has resulted in a vacancy in the position of
Engineering Director; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has conducted an extensive recruitment and selection process
and as a result of that process, now wishes to appoint Debra Heiser to the position of Engineering
Director;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota confirms the decision of the City Manager to appoint Ms. Heiser to the position
of Engineering Director.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 8c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: First Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Pertaining to Repair of Leaking Water
Service Lines
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance amending
Chapter 32, Sec. 32-202 of the St. Louis Park City Code pertaining to the Repair of Leaks, and to
set the second reading for September 3, 2013.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to amend the City Code to allow
the City to repair a property owner’s leaking service line and assess the repair costs to the
property if the leak cannot be shut off or is not repaired within 24 hours by the property owner?
SUMMARY: Staff is requesting an amendment to the City Code to amend Section 32-202:
Repair of leaks to allow the City to repair a leaking service line if the service cannot be shut off
because the leak is located on the street side of the curb stop (i.e. before the valve) and the
property owner does not make acceptable repair arrangements within 24 hours of notification.
The City’s repair costs would then be assessed to the property.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
Existing Ordinance: In the event of a leaking water service line, the recommended ordinance
change gives the property owner 24 hours after notification to arrange for repairs. If no
arrangements have been made, the ordinance allows the City to shut the water off until the
property owner has repaired the line. The problem occurs when the leak is located before the
shut-off valve so the service line cannot be turned off. Our previous ordinance did not allow the
City to assess the repairs if the property owner does not act in a timely manner. This is critical
since a leaking line can undermine the street and unnecessarily wastes a lot of water . City
Attorney, Tom Scott, has reviewed this proposed ordinance change.
Proposed Ordinance: Staff is requesting an amendment to the ordinance to provide staff the
authority to have the leak repaired immediately after the 24 hour notice has passed and then
assess the costs of the repairs to the property owner’s taxes.
NEXT STEPS: If the first reading is approved, then the City Code Amendment will be
scheduled for the September 3, 2013 City Council meeting for a second reading.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft of Proposed Ordinance
Prepared by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8c) Page 2
Title: First Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendment Pertaining to Repair of Leaking Water Service Lines
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. ____-13
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE REPAIR OF
WATER SERVICE LINES, AMENDING SECTION 32-202
OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CODE
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Section 32-202 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to
read in its entirety as follows:
Sec. 32-202. Repair of leaks.
The Property Owner shall be responsible for repairing any leaks in the service
pipeline to the property. In case of failure upon the part of any consumer or owner to
repair any leak occurring from their the service pipe within 24 hours after verbal or
written notice has been given upon the premises, the water will be shut off from the same
and will not be turned on until the sum leak is repaired and the fee as set by city council
resolution or ordinance has been paid. When in the judgment of the city the waste of
water is great significant, or when damage is likely to result from the leak, the water will
be turned off if the repair is not proceeded with immediately upon the giving of such
notice. If the water service leak is on the street side of the water shut-off and the leak
cannot be shut off, the city will have the service leak repaired and the cost of the repairs
will be added to the property owner’s taxes as a special assessment.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its passage and
publication.
First Reading August 19, 2013
Second Reading September 3, 2013
Date of Publication September 12, 2013
Date Ordinance takes effect September 27, 2013
ADOPTED this ___ day of _______, 2013, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council ________, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Discussion Item: 8d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project
Regarding Restaurants
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Major Amendment to
the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is City Council comfortable with the proposed increase in the
limit of restaurant building area allowed at the Shops at West End?
SUMMARY: The owner of The Shops at West End, AD West End LLC, proposes to add more
restaurants to the tenant mix than the original 2008 City approval anticipated.
The PUD currently allows the shopping center to have up to 82,277 square feet of restaurants.
The request is to increase the maximum gross building area of restaurants by 8,543 square feet to
a total of up to 90,820 square feet. The current restaurant tenants, plus some pending leases, will
bring the shopping center very near the current limit.
In 2008, City staff recommended including a condition of approval limiting the area of
restaurants. Restaurants, especially those with wait-staff, generally require more parking than
retail uses. The Shops at West End relies upon shared use of the neighboring office parking
ramps to meet its parking requirements. A 2007 Walker Parking Consultants shared parking
study for the proposed shopping center considered a tenant mix that included up to 82,277 square
feet of restaurants. Therefore, the City limited the area restaurants to the amount studied at that
time. Additional study has been done to explore the impact of the proposed additional restaurant
building area, including a 2013 study by Walker Parking Consultants (attached).
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the application on July 17, 2013, and
recommended approval of the amendment. City Council also discussed this item at its study
session on August 12, 2103.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Walker Parking Consultants Shared Parking Report (May 2013)
Shops at West End Tenant Mix
Shops at West End Lease Plan
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 2
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
DISCUSSION
DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: AD West End LLC requests an amendment to the Planned
Unit Development (PUD) to allow additional restaurants in The Shops at West End shopping
center. The request would allow more space within the existing shopping center to be used for
restaurants.
The PUD currently allows the shopping center to have up to 82,277 square feet of restaurants.
The request is to increase the maximum gross building area of restaurants by 8,543 square feet to
a total of up to 90,820 square feet.
The proposal does not increase the overall building area and does not provide additional parking.
BACKGROUND: The overall West End development includes a mix of existing and planned
office, shopping center, and residential uses. Up to four more office buildings (The Towers at
West End) totaling approximately 1,100,000 square feet is planned. Also, additional residential
development is also expected, but has not yet been approved for the development. The Shops at
West End shopping center currently includes grocery, entertainment, restaurant, retail, and office
uses.
The City approved a modification to lower the parking requirement for the shopping center based
on the mix of land uses and shared parking opportunities in the development. City staff
reviewed the peak hours and characteristics of the parking demand of the various uses (Parking
Generation 3rd Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2004). Also, the developer
commissioned Walker Parking Consultants to study this issue, both in 2007 and again in 2013.
The 2007 study considered a tenant mix that included a combination of fast food and fine/casual
restaurants that totaled 82,277 square feet. Based on Walker Parking Consultants report in 2007,
the City decided to limit the floor area of restaurants to the amount studied as a condition of PUD
approval. At the time, this was consistent with the shopping center leasing plan.
The shopping center has developed very closely to the original leasing plan. The Shops at West
End has been operating successfully for four years and is presently 80% leased. A few “shell”
building spaces are still available. The current restaurant tenants, plus some pending restaurant
leases, will bring the shopping center very near the current limit. Strong interest from additional
restaurant tenants is driving the request to allow more restaurants.
Walker Parking Consultants completed a new shared parking report (attached) in May 2013 that
evaluated a couple of different tenant mix scenarios, including the restaurant floor areas
proposed in this application.
ZONING ANALYSIS: The zoning code considers the requested change to be a Major
Amendment to the PUD, because having more restaurant floor area increases the City’s required
number of parking stalls. Since this application does not change the buildings or site design, the
focus of staff’s review is on the parking.
Although the Flats at West End apartments and the Olive Garden and Chili’s restaurants have a
total of 449 parking stalls and are part of the West End PUD, these properties do not share their
parking supply with other uses in the PUD. Therefore, staff excluded them from the analysis to
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 3
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
simplify the information presented, to focus on the shared parking, and to provide numbers that
are consistent with the Walker Parking Consultants report.
Parking Supply:
The shopping center has 1,726 parking spaces that are provided in a combination of a five-level
ramp, underground garage and surface parking. The office buildings at 1550 and 1600 Utica
Avenue South have 1,566 parking spaces in ramps. The office and shopping center parking
ramps flank Duke Drive and are connected by both a pedestrian skyway and a vehicular bridge to
facilitate and encourage shared parking. The combined parking supply is 3,292 spaces.
Parking Requirements:
The zoning code establishes minimum parking requirements based on the land use. For
structures containing multiple uses, each use is calculated separately. The requirements may be
revised upward or downward by the City Council as part of an application for a Planned Unit
Development based on verifiable information pertaining to parking.
The parking ordinance requires shopping centers to provide one parking space per 250 square
feet of gross floor area. However, the code also requires certain uses to be calculated separately,
because they generally require more parking than standard retail and service uses. Grocery
stores, theaters, and restaurants that have wait-staff are required to be calculated separately.
Basic Parking Calculations
The following table shows the basic calculation of the parking required for the proposed uses
when applying the formulas for each individual use and adding those together to an aggregated
total.
Basic Parking Requirement Calculations
Use Zoning ordinance Use intensity Base Requirement
1550/1600 Utica Ave 1 space per 325 SF 507,638 SF 1,561 spaces
Office Subtotal 1,561 spaces
Retail 1 space per 250 SF 134,066 SF 536 spaces
Restaurants 1 space per 60 SF 90,820 SF 1,514 spaces
Theater 1 space per 4 seats 2,700 seats 675 spaces
Office 1 space per 250 SF 35,396 SF 142 spaces
Grocery 1 space per 250 SF 55,288 SF 221 spaces
Shopping Center Subtotal 3,088 spaces
Pre-reduction Total 4,649 spaces
10% Transit Reduction (excluding apartments) 465 spaces
Total Requirement 4,184 spaces
However, the basic parking calculations above ignore the benefits of mixing uses and sharing
parking among the office and shopping center components. For example, the peak hours for the
movie theater occur after the peak office parking demand. Therefore, the City allowed the
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 4
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
shopping center to rely on the office parking ramps to meet the parking demand. Those shared
parking arrangements are protected by easement agreements.
Shared Parking Analysis
The 2013 Walker Parking Consultants report is attached for your review and provides a detailed
explanation and information.
The report shows that during normal operations (51 weeks out of the year) the parking supply is
both sufficient and convenient enough for patrons. It isn’t until the last week of December that
the parking supply could be exhausted during the peak weekday daytime hours. During this
limited time, the study indicated a potential shortage of 11 parking stalls in the peak weekday
hours.
If a shortfall occurs, it will be limited in duration, manageable, and avoidable if the shopping
center actively controls employee parking during the Christmas rush. In addition, the overall
West End development already has an approved Travel Demand Management Plan and can
implement the plan to help avoid and mitigate potential parking shortages and traffic impacts.
The Shops at West End can support the parking demand generated by the additional restaurant
area requested in the application.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 5
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
RESOLUTION NO. 13-___
Amends and Restates Resolution Nos. 08-057, 08-128, 09-040, 09-064, 10-093, and 11-016
A RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION
NOS. 08-057, 08-128, 09-040, 09-064, 10-093, AND 11-016 RELATING TO A
FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE WEST END
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST
QUADRANT OF INTERSTATE 394 AND HIGHWAY 100
The West End Redevelopment Project
WHEREAS, A.D. West End LLC has made application to the City Council for a Major
Amendment to a Final Planned Unit Development (Final PUD) for The West End
Redevelopment Project located at the southwest quadrant of Interstate 394 and Highway 100 and
legally described as THE SHOPS AT WEST END.
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the effect of the proposed amendment 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 and the effect of the
use on the Comprehensive Plan; and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a Final PUD was approved regarding the subject property pursuant to
Resolution No. 08-057 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated April 28, 2008 which contained
conditions applicable to said property; and
WHEREAS, a Minor Amendment to the Final PUD was approved regarding the subject
property pursuant to Resolution No. 08-128 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated October 6,
2008 which contained conditions applicable to said property; and
WHEREAS, a Minor Amendment to the Final PUD was approved regarding the subject
property pursuant to Resolution No. 09-040 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated March 2,
2009 which contained conditions applicable to said property; and
WHEREAS, a Minor Amendment to the Final PUD was approved regarding the subject
property pursuant to Resolution No. 09-064 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated May 4,
2009 which contained conditions applicable to said property; and
WHEREAS, a Major Amendment to the Final PUD was approved regarding the subject
property pursuant to Resolution No. 10-093 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated September
7, 2010 which contained conditions applicable to said property; and
WHEREAS, a Minor Amendment to the Final PUD was approved regarding the subject
property pursuant to Resolution 11-016 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated January 18,
2011 which contained conditions applicable to said property; and
WHEREAS, due to changed circumstances, amendments to those conditions are now
necessary, requiring the amendment of that Final PUD; and
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 6
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this resolution to continue and restate the conditions of the
Final PUD granted by Resolution Nos. 08-057, 08-128, 09-040, 09-064, 10-093, and 11-016 to
add the amendments now required, and to consolidate all conditions applicable to the subject
property in this resolution; and
WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case Files 13-27-PUD are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution Nos. 08-057, 08-128, 09-
040, 09-064, 10-093, and 11-016 are hereby restated and amended by this resolution which
continues and amends a Final Planned Unit Development to the subject property at the location
described above based on the following conditions:
1. The uses on the subject property are limited to retail, service, restaurants, hotel, theater,
and office. The following uses are not allowed: in-vehicle sales and service (drive-
through); motor fuel stations; motor vehicle sales, service and repair; car washes;
currency exchanges; check cashing; pay loan agencies; pawnshops; sexually-oriented
businesses, tattoo shops; gun shops (not excluding a sporting goods store that sells, as
part of its sporting goods inventory, guns and ammunition).
2. The final site plan and façade design of the large retail building on Lot 4, Block 1, THE
SHOPS AT WEST END (proposed grocery store) shall require a PUD Minor
Amendment with review by the Planning Commission.
3. The hotel site plans for Lot 3, Block 1, THE SHOPS AT WEST END shall require a
PUD Major Amendment if any variances are requested. If the plan does not require a
variance, the application may be processed as a PUD Minor Amendment and include
review and recommendation of the Planning Commission.
4. The total gross floor area of restaurants shall be limited to 82,277 90,820 square feet on
the combination of Lot 4, Block 1 and Lot 2, Block 2, THE SHOPS AT WEST END,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
5. The total number of seats in the movie theater shall be limited to 2,700 seats.
6. Tenants in Building 32 shall be limited to Mercantile (Group M) uses as defined in the
2007 Minnesota State Building Code, such as retail or wholesale stores, sales rooms,
department stores, drug stores, markets, etc.
7. The portion of the five-level retail parking structure (Building 35) that is within 20 feet of
the Gamble Drive right-of-way shall have a minimum of 60% Class I exterior materials.
The Developer shall amend the Official Exhibits to comply with this requirement.
8. The Community Development Director and Zoning Administrator or their designee(s)
may approve individual tenant/building façade designs administratively or refer proposals
to the Planning Commission and City Council for consideration, as City staff deems
necessary.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 7
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
9. The sign plan is subject to Community Development Director and Zoning Administrator
review and approval. Sign permits are required.
10. Access to the truck courts on the west retail block from Park Place Boulevard shall be
limited to between 8 p.m. and 10 a.m.
11. The access will be controlled from Park Place Boulevard to the truck courts on the west
retail block using a mechanical bollard system and directional signs in the Park Place
Boulevard right-of-way. The Developer shall enter into a Planning Development Contract
with the City of St. Louis Park that addresses this private use of public land.
12. The Developer shall maintain horizontal separation from landscaping (i.e. boulevard
trees) of at least three feet from shallow underground utilities (i.e. fiber optic cable,
private utilities, etc.), and eight feet horizontal separation from deeper underground
utilities (i.e. water, sanitary sewer, etc.).
13. Tree plantings and street furnishings shall be located in a manner that maintains at least
six feet wide clearance space in all boulevard/sidewalk areas for snow removal.
14. The Developer shall amend the Official Exhibits (The Shops at West End Design
Guidelines) to incorporate the following:
a. At pedestrian level, facades on Buildings 12, 22, 23, 24, 31, 32 and 33 shall
be primarily transparent:
1. At least 60% of facades between 3 feet and 7 feet above the first
floor elevation shall consist of pedestrian entrances, display windows or
windows affording views into retail, offices, gallery or lobby space.
The West End Tenant Design Guidelines shall illustrate the portions of the
above referenced buildings subject to this requirement.
2. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum of three feet,
but display of merchandise in this space is allowed. Display windows
may be used to meet the transparency requirement.
b. At pedestrian level (between 3 feet and 7 feet above the first floor elevation),
building facades facing public streets, West End Boulevard, or the pedestrian
arcade shall have no more than 10% of the total window area be glass block,
mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass.
c. No more than 10% of the total window area of any building façade shall have
signs applied to the inside or outside surface of the window. The remaining 90%
of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted glass that allows views
into and out of the building.
d. Tenants in Buildings 12, 22, 24, 31, and 33 that are located adjacent to
public
and/or private street intersections shall locate entrances at or near the
adjacent
building corner.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 8
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
e. Awnings and canopies shall be made of heavy canvas, fabric, metal and/or glass.
Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. Backlit awnings and canopies are
prohibited.
15. A business may use the sidewalk within five feet of its building wall for the following
purposes, provided the business maintains a clear walkway that is at least eight feet wide
along Park Place Boulevard and at least six feet wide along other streets, and provided
the uses do not occur in the public right-of-way unless the City approves an
encroachment agreement in accordance with the City’s Temporary Private Use of Public
Land Policy:
a. Display of merchandise, not to exceed 100 square feet per business;
b. Benches, planters, ornaments, art;
c. Signs permitted in the zoning ordinance; and
d. Outdoor dining. Outdoor dining areas may extend farther than five-feet from the
building wall, provided tables and chairs or other structures maintain the required
horizontal clearance for a walkway between the dining area and other
obstructions, such as trees, poles, and curbs.
16. The Developer shall provide easements and $285,000 for public art to help satisfy the
alternative landscaping requirements. The City and the Developer will develop a public
process to select the artists, artworks and locations.
17. The Developer shall amend Official Exhibits (utility plans) to provide separate domestic
and fire water service lines to the buildings.
18. The developer shall work with the Police Department on the design and construction of
the police substation area in Building 31. In particular, the plan shall provide windows
and doorway on the northeast building elevation along the alley.
19. The developer shall redesign the public restroom entrances in the Building 31 atrium to
have open entrances (no exterior doors to the atrium), similar to typical stadium/movie
theater restroom entrances, as requested by the Police Department.
20. At City of St. Louis Park’s sole discretion, and upon conferring with the property owner,
the property owner shall change the designation of West End Boulevard on-street parking
stalls from short-term customer parking to “pick-up/drop-off only” (or similar
restriction).
21. The applicant shall be responsible to obtain all permits from the City and other agencies.
22. The property owner(s) shall be responsible for obtaining a City license for all parking
structures.
23. Tenants shall be responsible for obtaining all City licenses (i.e. grocery store, hotel, etc.).
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 9
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
24. The property owner shall prepare and effectuate traffic management plans that reduce
traffic congestion. The property owner submitted a plan for review and approval of the by
the St. Louis Park and Golden Valley I-394 Joint Task Force. The property owner shall
implement The Traffic Management Plan (TMP) approved by the Travel Demand
Management Joint Task Force prior to City issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
25. The City and Developer shall set up a monitoring program to determine actual sanitary
sewer flows. Following each phase of the development, sewer flows will be analyzed to
determine if sewer flows exceed Metropolitan Council limits described in the
Metropolitan Council’s letter to the City of St. Louis Park dated December 14, 2006. If
sanitary sewer flows exceed said limits, the Developer shall submit a final design of a
privately owned, privately maintained, temporary sanitary sewer peak flow detention
facilities for Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) and City of St. Louis
Park approval. The Developer shall construct the said approved system and put it into
operation in the timeframe designated by MCES and City of St. Louis Park, and prior to
City issuance of building permits for additional phases.
26. The Developer shall abide by the City’s water use restrictions and follow State of
Minnesota requirements for low-flow structures. After each phase of the redevelopment,
water usage shall be monitored. If monitoring shows use exceeds 90% of peak capacity,
the Developer shall cooperate with the City to identify citywide and project-specific
measures to increase water treatment capacity and reduce consumption prior to City
issuance of building permits.
27. The north office tower and operations center at 1551 Utica Avenue (Lot 1, Block 2, THE
SHOPS AT WEST END) shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the
Official Exhibits from Zoning Application 86-14-SP and 07-61-PUD. If there is any
conflict between the Official Exhibits, 07-61-PUD shall supersede. The following 86-14-
SP Official Exhibits are incorporated by reference herein: Exhibit A – Site Plan and
Lighting Plan; Exhibit B – Grading Plan; Exhibit C – Utilities Plan; Exhibit D –
Landscape Plan; Exhibit E – Building Elevations; Exhibit F – Basement Floor Level
Plan; Exhibit G – Ground Floor Plan; Exhibit H – Second Floor Plan; and Exhibit I –
Typical Floor Plan, as modified by City Development on March 13, 1986. (The floor
plans are included to show general use and configurations only.)
28. The following conditions shall apply to the south office tower at 1600 Utica Avenue (Lot
1, Block 2, THE SHOPS AT WEST END):
a. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the
Official Exhibits from Zoning Application 98-42-PUD and 07-61-PUD. If
there is any conflict between the Official Exhibits, 07-61-PUD shall supersede.
The following 98-42-PUD Official Exhibits are incorporated by reference
herein: Exhibit A – Site Plan, Exhibit B – Landscape Plan, Exhibit C –
Existing Survey, Exhibit D – Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan,
Exhibit E – Utility Plan, Exhibit F – East Elevations, Exhibit G – North
Elevation, Exhibit H – South Elevation, Exhibit I – West Elevations, Exhibit J –
West Elevation - Parking Ramp, and Exhibit K – Parking Ramp elevation
(south).
b. Parking ramp layouts and site plan shall provide designation of at least 20 bicycle
racks and at least 20 carpool spaces in convenient locations.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 10
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
c. A covenant shall be recorded on the property which specifies that a minimum
of 4,000 square feet of the atrium shall remain in perpetuity as indoor open
space and available for general “public” use. Said interior atrium space shall be
designed in an aesthetically pleasing and usable way, with landscaping,
benches, and the like. A detailed atrium plan shall be submitted and approved
by the Community Development Director and the Zoning Administrator.
d. The following modifications to ordinance requirements are re-authorized:
1. The floor area ratio for the PUD can be 1.57.
2. The setbacks on Gamble Drive for the parking ramp can be 17 feet.
3. Reduced office building setback along Gamble Drive of 96 feet.
29. The Chili’s restaurant site at 5245 Wayzata Boulevard (Lot 2, Block 1, THE SHOPS AT
WEST END) shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official
Exhibits from Zoning Applications 91-13-SP and 07-61-PUD. If there is any conflict
between the Official Exhibits, 07-61-PUD shall supersede. The following 91-13-SP
Official Exhibits are incorporated by reference herein: Exhibit A – Overall Site Plan,
Exhibit B – Site Plan, Exhibit C – Grading Plan, Exhibit D – Landscape Plan, Exhibit E –
Floor Plan, and Exhibit F and F-1 – Elevations.
30. The Olive Garden restaurant site at 5235 Wayzata Boulevard (Lot 1, Block 1, THE
SHOPS AT WEST END) shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the
Official Exhibits from Zoning Applications 93-9-CUP, 93-34-CUP and 07-61-PUD. If
there is any conflict between the Official Exhibits, 07-61-PUD shall supersede. The
following 93-9-CUP and 93-34-CUP Official Exhibits are incorporated by reference
herein: Exhibit A-1 – Site Plan, Exhibit B – Utility Plan, Exhibit C-1 – Landscape Plan,
and Exhibit D – Exterior Elevations.
31. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following conditions shall be met:
a. A Planning Development Contract shall be executed between the Developer and
City that addresses, at a minimum:
1. Conditions of PUD approval as applicable or appropriate;
2. Public use of gathering spaces in the development;
3. Private use of public land
4. Maintenance agreement and/or special service district;
5. Surety in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit for Redeveloper Public
Improvements and landscaping; and
6. Administrative approval of modifications to the PUD plans.
The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute said Planning
Development Contract.
b. The Developer shall provide a surety to the City of St. Louis Park in the form of
an irrevocable letter of credit for 1.10 times the estimated Redeveloper
Public Improvements costs (as defined in the Redevelopment Agreement), and
1.25 times the estimated landscaping costs.
c. The property owner shall pay the applicable Traffic Management Administrative
Fee.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 11
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
1. The portion of the shopping center subject to this fee is on Lot 2, Block 2,
THE SHOPS AT WEST END. The total fee of $34,633 shall be paid to
the City of St. Louis Park prior to City issuance of building permits.
2. Subsequent phases of the PUD (future hotel and office towers) shall pay
fifty percent of the fee upon submission of a Final PUD Amendment
application, and the remaining fifty percent of the fee upon submission of
a building permit application, for each respective development phase.
32. The Planned Unit Development shall be amended on October 6, 2008 to incorporate all
of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions relating to Lot 4, Block 1,
THE SHOPS AT WEST END, Hennepin County, Minnesota:
a. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official
Exhibits from Zoning Application 08-32-PUD, including Exhibits C4B-Site
Layout Plan North, C8A-Utility Plan, C10B-Landscape Street Plan, A11101-
Building 11 Overall Plan, A11111-Building 11 Level 1 Area 1, A111112-
Building 11 Level 1 Area 2, A11401-Building 11 Exterior Elevations, such
documents incorporated by reference herein.
b. Overnight cart storage shall be inside the building.
c. The Developer shall continue to work with City staff through a public process to
select public art and the complete plaza design.
d. The Developer shall submit a site plan and programming plan for the plaza area to
the City for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator.
e. The building proposal includes graphic art panels in order to enhance the
appearance of the building and pedestrian environment. The Developer shall
submit plans for the graphics on the backlit translucent wall-mounted panels for
review and approval by the Zoning Administrator. The panels and/or graphics
shall be changed from time to time and at least biennially. The panel may
include any mosaic, mural, painting or graphic art or combination thereof which is
professionally applied to the panel that does not contain any brand name, product
name, letters of the alphabet spelling or abbreviating the name of any product,
company, profession or business, or any logo, trademark, trade name, or other
commercial message (defined as supergraphics in the City Sign Code and exempt
from the Sign Code provisions). The Developer shall allow use of the panels for
public art. Proposed public art shall be subject to review and approval by the
Developer and building tenant(s).
f. Assent Form and Official Exhibits must be signed by the applicant (or applicant
and owner if applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of a building
permit.
g. The sign plan is subject to Community Development Director and Zoning
Administrator review and approval. Sign permits are required.
h. Approval of Building Permits, which may impose additional requirements.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 12
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
i. A Planning Development Contract between the Developer and City shall be
amended to address, at a minimum:
1. Amended conditions of PUD approval as applicable or appropriate;
2. Public use of the plaza gathering space;
3. Temporary uses of the plaza; and
4. Administrative approval of modifications to the PUD plans.
33. The Planned Unit Development shall be amended on May 4, 2009 to incorporate all of
the preceding conditions and add the following conditions relating to Lot 4, Block 1 and
Lot 2, Block 2, THE SHOPS AT WEST END, Hennepin County, Minnesota:
a. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official
Exhibits from Zoning Application 09-07-VAR and 09-08-PUD relating to the
Shops at West End Sign Plan, such documents incorporated by reference herein.
34. The Planned Unit Development shall be amended on September 7, 2010 to incorporate all
of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions relating to Lot 3, Block 1,
THE SHOPS AT WEST END, Hennepin County, Minnesota:
a. The PUD major amendment is for the development of a six-story, 120-unit
apartment building with structured parking to be developed at 5310 16th Street W,
with five off-site parking stalls and 3,136 square feet of the designed outdoor
recreation area provided off-site.
b. The following PUD modifications, in addition to modifications previously
authorized for the overall Shops at West End PUD:
1. Floor area ratio of 3.24.
2. Housing density of 112.6 units per acre.
c. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official
Exhibits from Zoning Applications 10-23-PUD and 10-25-VAR relating to a
shadow variance, including Exhibits A100 Site Plan (revised 01/10/2011), AB101
Lower Level Garage Plan (revised 01/10/2011), A101 First Floor Plan (revised
01/10/2011), A102 Second Floor Plan (revised 01/10/2011), A103 Floors 3-6
Typical Floor Plan (revised 01/10/2011), A400 Exterior Elevations (revised
01/10/2011), A401 Exterior Elevations (revised 01/10/2011), L100 Landscape
Plan (revised 01/10/2011), such documents incorporated by reference herein.
d. The five (5) proposed off-site parking stalls shall be protected by an irrevocable
covenant in a form approved by the City Attorney. A certified copy of the
recorded document shall be provided to the Zoning Administrator within 60 days
after approval.
e. Prior to starting any site work, the following conditions shall be met:
1. The owner/applicant shall sign an Assent Form and the Official Exhibits.
2. All necessary permits must be obtained.
3. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate
development, construction and City representatives.
f. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the following conditions shall be met:
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 13
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
1. Plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and Zoning Administrator
to ensure that all proposed utilities, public access points and construction
documents conform to the requirements of the City Code of Ordinances
and City policies.
2. The applicant shall pay park dedication and trail dedication fees.
3. To ensure construction of the landscaping and the cleaning of public
streets during construction, a financial guarantee shall be provided in the
amount of 125% of the cost of the landscaping materials. The
performance guarantee shall be in the form of cash escrow or letter of
credit. The financial guarantee will be refunded upon project
completion, however, a 25% will be retained for one year after
installation to ensure the plants have survived the warranty period.
4. The planned installation of any mechanical equipment shall include
means to ensure it is fully screened from off-site view.
5. The proposed off-site parking facilities and shared parking facilities shall
be protected by an irrevocable covenant in a form approved by the City
Attorney. The applicant shall submit a certified copy of the recorded
document to the Zoning Administrator.
g. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
1. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be
no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.
2. The applicant shall pay park dedication and trail dedication fees.
3. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto
neighborhood properties.
4. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as
necessary.
5. The City shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in
a public street. Work in a public street shall take place only upon the
determination by the Director of Public Works that appropriate safety
measures have been taken to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety.
h. Prior to the issuance of any temporary or permanent occupancy permit the
following shall be completed:
1. Fire lanes shall be signed and striped in accordance with the signed
Official Exhibits.
2. Landscaping and irrigation shall be in accordance with the signed
Official Exhibits.
3. Exterior building improvements shall be completed in accordance with
the signed Official Exhibits and approved materials and colors.
4. All mechanical equipment shall be installed and it shall be demonstrated
that all such equipment is fully screened from off-site views. To protect
the health, safety and welfare of the community, the painting of
mechanical equipment shall not be considered screening.
i. No outside storage is permitted. Incidental outside storage shall be removed
within 48 hours.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Page 14
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
35. The Planned Unit Development shall be amended on January 18, 2011 to incorporate all
of the preceding conditions with amendments to conditions relating to Lot 3, Block 1,
THE SHOPS AT WEST END, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
36. The Planned Unit Development shall be amended on August 19, 2013, to incorporate all
of the preceding conditions with an amendment to condition #4 relating to the total
building area of restaurants allowed on the combination of Lot 4, Block 1 and Lot 2,
Block 2, THE SHOPS AT WEST END, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
a. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant and property owner shall sign
the Official Exhibits.
In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750
per violation of any condition of this approval.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
j:\18-1124-02-shops at west end-update 2013\reports\20130509 shared parking report 1.1.docx
9 May 2013
Gary Gleason, PE
VP Construction
Duke Realty
1600 Utica Avenue South, Suite 250
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Re: West End Retail Project
Walker Project #18-1124.02
Dear Mr. Gleason,
Walker Parking Consultants is pleased to present the results of our shared parking
analysis of the proposed West End Retail project.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
A.D. West, LLC has developed The Shops at West End, a mixed-use development
located just south of Wayzata Boulevard and east of Park Place Boulevard in St. Louis
Park. The project was designed to take advantage of shared parking opportunities,
both within the development and with an adjacent office property.
Currently, the development has 330,594 sf leased, and has the potential to add to its
tenant roster. Two scenarios are under consideration – one a major retailer, the other
an active entertainment venue with a bowling alley. The summary of current land uses
and future options is shown in Table 1.
Walker Parking Consultants
50 West 23rd Street, Suite 704
New York, NY 10010
Voice: 212.288.2501
Fax: 212.288.2542
www.walkerparking.com
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants Page 15
Gary Gleason
9 May 2013
Page 2
Table 1: Land Use Summary
Source: Duke Realty, 2013
Walker has been working with Duke Realty since the project was planned, to help size
the parking. Using shared parking methodology, the goal of the initial study and
subsequent updates as the project has developed, has been to build the parking
system to match the needs of the development. Overbuilding parking just for the sake
of always having ample parking is very costly, and comes at the expense of other
potential land uses that make the development more appealing as a destination. On
the other hand, underbuilding the parking discourages customers and potential
tenants.
SHARED PARKING OVERVIEW
Shared-use parking is a concept in which land uses in close proximity share a pool of
available spaces in order to reduce the overall parking needs for the development.
The concept works well in situations where parking demand for different uses peaks at
different times of the day. For example, an office and a cinema can share parking
effectively because an office will experience peak demand during the day on
weekdays, while a cinema will experience peak demand in the evening on a
weekend. It is therefore not necessary to build the full supply needed for the office plus
the full supply for the cinema if these two land uses are close enough together that they
can reasonably share a common supply. In shared parking, the whole is less than the
sum of its parts.
In addition to the reduction in inventory that is possible when different land uses have
different peak hours of utilization, mixed-use developments may experience a
reduction in demand due to captive effects. A captive market occurs when a user
group has already parked in an area for a long period and then patronizes nearby
commercial establishments without generating new car trips or parking demand. For
example, a restaurant in close proximity to a large office building may be very busy at
Retail 93,184 sf 61,304 sf 8,304 sf
Fine dining(1)72,392 sf 8,110 sf 8,110 sf (1) "Existing" includes 2,250 sf within Comedy Club.
Fast food 7,834 sf 2,484 sf 2,484 sf
Theatre(2)59,500 sf (2) 2,700-seat cinema.
Grocery 55,288 sf
Office 35,396 sf
Specialty(3)7,000 sf 32,578 sf
Total 330,594 sf 71,898 sf 51,476 sf
Notes
(3) Existing 7,000 sf is comedy club, exclusive of
dining portion. In Scenario B, the added 32,578 sf is
an active entertainment venue with a bowling
alley.
Existing
Retail Tenant
Proposed Future Additions
Active Entertainment
Tenant
Scenario BScenario A
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants Page 16
Gary Gleason
9 May 2013
Page 3
lunch, but is unlikely to generate nearly as many cars as a stand-alone restaurant
because much of its business will come from the “captive” market of people who work
in the office building and are already parked on site for the day. The effects of a
captive market vary greatly, depending on the size of the market, the type of
commercial space, and the characteristics of surrounding land uses.
THE SHARED PARKING MODEL
Walker’s Shared Parking Model is based on the Urban Land Institute and International
Council of Shopping Center’s Shared Parking 1 publication. Walker led a team of
consultants in writing the updated Shared Parking Second Edition, which was published
in November of 2005, and features the most up-to-date parking demand model. The
model is designed to project the parking needs of a mixed-use development from 6:00
a.m. to 12:00 midnight on a typical weekday and a Saturday for every month of the
year.
BASE PARKING DEMAND RATIOS
Base parking demand ratios, as found in the ULI Shared Parking model and in some
cases refined through additional research by Walker, are used as a starting point in the
modeling process. Based on industry research, the ratios reflect the peak parking
demand for a particular kind of land use in the absence of shared use opportunities
and/or transit-use reductions. These adjustments are made subsequently, on a site-
specific basis. Table 2 shows the base ratios for visitors and employees for a weekday
and weekend.
Table 2: Base Parking Demand Ratios
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2013.
The base ratios are tailored to site conditions by applying driving ratios, non-captive
factors, and presence factors.
DRIVING RATIO ADJUSTMENT
Adjustments are made to account for the number of patrons who arrive at the subject
property by means other than personal vehicle. We assume all visitors will drive to the
1 Shared Parking Second Edition, 2005, The Urban Land Institute, Washington, D.C.
Land Use Unit Total
Visitor Employee Visitor Employee Weekday Weekend
Retail 2.90 0.70 3.20 0.80 /ksf GLA 3.60 4.00
Fine/Casual Dining 15.25 2.75 17.00 3.00 /ksf GLA 18.00 20.00
Fast Food/QSR 12.75 2.25 12.00 2.00 /ksf GLA 15.00 14.00
Nightclubs 15.25 1.25 17.50 1.25 /ksf GLA 16.50 18.75
Active Entertainment - painting studio 4.20 0.40 6.50 0.50 /ksf GLA 4.60 7.00
Theater 0.19 0.01 0.26 0.01 /seat 0.20 0.27
Office 25k to 100k sq ft 0.25 3.15 0.03 0.35 /ksf GFA 3.40 0.38
Specialty Grocer 3.00 0.50 3.25 0.50 /ksf GLA 3.50 3.75
Active Entertainment with Bowling 3.00 1.20 5.25 1.50 /ksf GLA 4.20 6.75
Spaces required per unit land use
Weekday Weekend
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
Page 17
Gary Gleason
9 May 2013
Page 4
site – a conservative assumption. For employees, we have based reductions on
“journey to work” data from the census for St. Louis Park.
NON-CAPTIVE ADJUSTMENT
The non-captive adjustment is made on sites where all-day parkers patronize retail,
dining and entertainment uses. These all-day parkers – employees, hotel guests,
residents – do not create parking demand when they walk over to a restaurant or shop,
and thus reduce the parking needs for the site as a whole. Captive market adjustments
depend on the relative sizes of land uses, and the types of retail and dining options on
the site.
PRESENCE FACTORS
Presence is the last factor applied to the shared parking model. It is expressed as a
percentage of potential demand modified for time of day, day of week, and time of
year. Considering that parking demand for each land use may peak at different times
generally means that fewer parking spaces are needed for the combination of land
uses in a project than would be required if each land use is considered separately.
The shared parking demand model evaluates parking demand for each land use from
6:00 a.m. to midnight on weekdays and weekends for every month of the year. An
additional analysis of the last week of December is included and treated as a
“thirteenth month.” During this unique period, special analysis is required due to the
difference in parking demand patterns between the pre-Christmas shopping season
and the Christmas week vacation period.
SHARED OFFICE BUILDING PARKING
As discussed above, the retail project has been designed to make use of shared
opportunities with the adjacent office buildings as well as within the retail project itself.
The extent to which parking on an adjacent site can reasonably be shared depends on
the walking distances and other sources of pedestrian “friction” such as major
boulevards that must be crossed, traffic etc. Walker often uses the concept of level of
service (LOS), which establishes a qualitative measure to characterize operational
conditions. The descriptions of individual levels of service are defined from A to F, with
LOS A representing the best operating conditions. LOS D is typically the value of the
minimum acceptable standard for parking and transportation systems. (However,
traffic engineers will sometimes rate systems to LOS E for the minimum standard). The
following table illustrates Walker’s LOS pertaining to walking distances from a parking
facility to the patron’s ultimate destination.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants Page 18
Gary Gleason
9 May 2013
Page 5
Table 3: LOS Maximum Walking Distance
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2013.
The office parking structures are within a LOS of A or B walking distance to the retail,
making it a viable overflow option for customers as well as employees. In addition,
there are no major street crossings that would create a psychological barrier to using
the adjacent garage. It is our understanding that the ramp is currently used by
employees and visitors to the West End Retail site with no issues.
The amount of parking available in the office structure varies, depending on the
timeframe. Most of the supply is available on weekends and a little less is available on
weeknights, when there is still a notable presence in the offices in the early evening
hours. In late December many employees take vacation (our model uses 20 percent,
which may well be conservative), so in general a ramp that is typically crowded on
weekdays is likely to have a surplus during that week. On other weekdays, in theory a
ramp will be full. However, we modeled the parking demand associated with the
490,000 sf of office using the ramp currently, and found that the ramp should have
some surplus space at all times (even assuming a 100 percent drive ratio). Our
projection is shown below.
Maximum Walking Distance LOS D LOS C LOS B LOS A
Within Parking Facilities
Surface Lot 1,400' 1,050' 700' 350'
Structure 1,200' 900' 600' 300'
From Parking Destination
Climate controlled 5,200' 3,800' 2,400' 1,000'
Outdoors, covered 2,000' 1,500' 1,000' 500'
Outdoors, uncovered 1,600' 1,200' 800' 400'
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants Page 19
Gary Gleason
9 May 2013
Page 6
Table 4: Projected Surpluses - Office Parking 2
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2013.
The surplus is used in our analysis of peak parking demand for the retail project; some
issues associated with this are discussed in the Findings section.
PROJECTED PEAK DEMAND
The tables that follow show the projected parking needs, and ability of the supply to
accommodate those needs, during the weekday, weeknight, and weekend peak
periods for each month of the year.
SCENARIO A: RETAIL TENANT
Table 5 shows the projected parking needs for the project site on a typical peak
weekday, weeknight and weekend for each month of the year. As the table shows,
there is a significant parking deficit (488 spaces) during late December when the
cinema is busy during the weekdays due to school vacations. Smaller deficits are
projected during the Christmas shopping season and during the summer.
However, based on our modeling of the adjacent office, we anticipate that enough
spaces are available in the office ramp to offset the deficits during each period except
the last week of December, when a small deficit will remain.
2 Our original report assumed that the office ramp was completely full on weekdays and
reduced demand for off-peak hours by typical presence percentages starting from a baseline
of 1,566. For this update we have modeled the existing office according to industry standards
rather than simply assuming a parking demand equal to the supply.
Month
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
JANUARY 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
FEBRUARY 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
MARCH 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
APRIL 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
MAY 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
JUNE 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
JULY 1,314 1,566 252 310 1,566 1,256 132 1,566 1,434
AUGUST 1,314 1,566 252 310 1,566 1,256 132 1,566 1,434
SEPTEMBER 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
OCTOBER 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
NOVEMBER 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
DECEMBER 1,383 1,566 183 326 1,566 1,240 138 1,566 1,428
LATE DECEMBER*1,106 1,566 460 261 1,566 1,305 110 1,566 1,456
*Christmas to New Year
Weekday Daytime (8 am - 5 pm)Weeknights (6 pm - 11 pm)Weekends (All Day/Evening)
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
Page 20
Gary Gleason
9 May 2013
Page 7
Table 5: Projected Peak Demand – Scenario A (Additional Retail)
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2013.
SCENARIO B: ACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT
Table 6 shows the projected parking needs for the project site under Scenario B. Here
too, peak demand is very high during the post-Christmas season due to the cinema,
but the adjacent office ramp is projected to have adequate capacity to
accommodate almost all of the demand.
Table 6: Projected Peak Demand -- Scenario B (Active Entertainment)
Source: Walker Parking Consultants, 2013.
Month
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Available
from
Office
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Available
from
Office
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Available
from
Office
JANUARY 1,556 1,726 170 183 1,936 1,726 -210 1,240 2,311 1,726 -585 1,428
FEBRUARY 1,545 1,726 181 183 1,914 1,726 -188 1,240 2,237 1,726 -511 1,428
MARCH 1,666 1,726 60 183 2,077 1,726 -351 1,240 2,464 1,726 -738 1,428
APRIL 1,636 1,726 90 183 2,031 1,726 -305 1,240 2,358 1,726 -632 1,428
MAY 1,706 1,726 20 183 2,126 1,726 -400 1,240 2,508 1,726 -782 1,428
JUNE 1,733 1,726 -7 183 2,173 1,726 -447 1,240 2,582 1,726 -856 1,428
JULY 1,767 1,726 -41 252 2,243 1,726 -517 1,256 2,678 1,726 -952 1,434
AUGUST 1,756 1,726 -30 252 2,210 1,726 -484 1,256 2,590 1,726 -864 1,434
SEPTEMBER 1,611 1,726 115 183 1,995 1,726 -269 1,240 2,294 1,726 -568 1,428
OCTOBER 1,661 1,726 65 183 2,062 1,726 -336 1,240 2,448 1,726 -722 1,428
NOVEMBER 1,694 1,726 32 183 2,109 1,726 -383 1,240 2,546 1,726 -820 1,428
DECEMBER 1,869 1,726 -143 183 2,230 1,726 -504 1,240 2,672 1,726 -946 1,428
LATE DECEMBER*2,214 1,726 -488 460 2,345 1,726 -619 1,305 2,698 1,726 -972 1,456
*Christmas to New Year
Weekday Daytime (8 am - 5 pm)Weeknights (6 pm - 11 pm)Weekends (All Day/Evening)
Month
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Available
from
Office
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Available
from
Office
Peak
Demand Supply
Surplus/
(Deficit)
Available
from
Office
JANUARY 1,496 1,726 230 183 1,941 1,726 -215 1,240 2,406 1,726 -680 1,428
FEBRUARY 1,484 1,726 242 183 1,919 1,726 -193 1,240 2,332 1,726 -606 1,428
MARCH 1,601 1,726 125 183 2,087 1,726 -361 1,240 2,576 1,726 -850 1,428
APRIL 1,571 1,726 155 183 2,036 1,726 -310 1,240 2,459 1,726 -733 1,428
MAY 1,637 1,726 89 183 2,127 1,726 -401 1,240 2,605 1,726 -879 1,428
JUNE 1,668 1,726 58 183 2,173 1,726 -447 1,240 2,679 1,726 -953 1,428
JULY 1,718 1,726 8 252 2,249 1,726 -523 1,256 2,784 1,726 -1,058 1,434
AUGUST 1,688 1,726 38 252 2,211 1,726 -485 1,256 2,693 1,726 -967 1,434
SEPTEMBER 1,546 1,726 180 183 2,000 1,726 -274 1,240 2,398 1,726 -672 1,428
OCTOBER 1,594 1,726 132 183 2,069 1,726 -343 1,240 2,558 1,726 -832 1,428
NOVEMBER 1,616 1,726 110 183 2,104 1,726 -378 1,240 2,644 1,726 -918 1,428
DECEMBER 1,753 1,726 -27 183 2,216 1,726 -490 1,240 2,743 1,726 -1,017 1,428
LATE DECEMBER*2,197 1,726 -471 460 2,373 1,726 -647 1,305 2,805 1,726 -1,079 1,456
*Christmas to New Year
Weekday Daytime (8 am - 5 pm)Weeknights (6 pm - 11 pm)Weekends (All Day/Evening)
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants
Page 21
Gary Gleason
9 May 2013
Page 8
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Our projection indicates that the office ramp can accommodate most of the overflow
from the retail site, with a few shortages during the post-Christmas week. Using the
ramp for West End employee parking would be efficient.
There are management options that can be used to accommodate the projected
deficit and any larger deficit that might occur if the office buildings generate demand
at higher than normal rates now or in the future, such that they can offer less overflow
space. Some options include:
1. Incentivizing employees not to drive during the busiest periods.
2. Leasing overflow space from surrounding land owners and having employees
park there.
3. Using nearby space owned by Duke that is planned for office. Once the office
is built, the ramps supporting the office could be used for overflow during the
post-Christmas period, and/or for valet parking to increase the supply.
4. Hiring valet attendants to park extra cars in the ramp (or some portions of the
West End site, for that matter);
When parking is free and unmonitored, it can be difficult to get employees to use
overflow space that is fairly far away (long walk or requiring a shuttle) or to use
alternative modes of travel. It is feasible, but requires hands-on management. Duke
Realty has a clause in all tenant leases allowing Duke to manage employee parking as
necessary, which is helpful. Also helpful is the fact that the percentage of employees
that would need to be managed off-site is small – a few dozen out of several hundred –
so getting enough compliance should be achievable. As outlined in items three and
four above, there are easier options than truly remote parking or alternative transit:
Using the nearby Duke-owned office site would be easier to manage than an off-site
lease with longer walking distances; the proximity will reduce the sense of
inconvenience that a remote parking lot can have. Valet is an easy option as well and
offers a nice level of service for customers, a certain percentage of whom will be willing
to pay a surcharge for the convenience.
Please don’t hesitate to contact me with any questions you may have.
Sincerely,
WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS
Carolyn H. Krasnow, Ph.D.
Vice President
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants Page 22
Tenant SF retail fine dining fast food theatre grocery office specialty notes
Signed Leases
Kerasotes Theater/Star Bar 59,500 59,500
Roundy's 55,288 55,288
Verizon Wireless 2,054 2,054
Noodles & Co.2,542 2,542
Crave 8,343 8,343
Glamour Nails 1,690 1,690
Roosters Men's Grooming Center 1,634 1,634
Cooper 7,427 7,427
Toby Keith's I Love this Bar & Grill 15,000 15,000
Omaha Steaks 1,230 1,230
Mall Office 2,396 2,396
Anthropologie 11,000 11,000
Love Culture 8,000 8,000
Creative Kidstuff 4,000 4,000
Jimmy John's 2,248 2,248
Republic of Couture 4,000 4,000
Lululemon Athletica 2,500 2,500
Subway 1,544 1,544
Rojo 9,065 9,065
Hot Mama/Brian 2,409 2,409
NutriShop/Tracy 1,288 1,288
Haute Barre 1,229 1,229
Cooper Expansion 1,495 1,495
Crave Expansion 750 750
Wedding Day Diamonds 3,000 3,000
Bergstrom Jewelers 4,716 4,716
Charming Charlie's 10,400 10,400
Jos. A. Bank 4,800 4,800
Little Szechuan 3,924 3,924
Filios 7,764 7,764
White House Black Mkt 3,000 3,000
Phresh Spa Salon 3,115 3,115
Hot Mama Expansion 2,149 2,149
Parmida Home 11,000 11,000
Primp 1,825 1,825
Blast Blow Dry Bar 2,269 2,269
Raku 3,679 3,679
Brush 2,195 2,195 combination painting studio and wine bar
Apricot Lane 1,820 1,820
Forever Yogurt 1,500 1,500
Minq 2,856 2,856
Francesca's 1,200 1,200
Restaurant - Building 23 south 10,500 10,500
Comedy Club - Building 23 south 9,250 2,250 7,000 2,250 sf resturant and 7,000 cemedy club
Regus 12,000 12,000
Baker Asociates 21,000 21,000
Subtotal Signed Leases:330,594 93,184 72,392 7,834 59,500 55,288 35,396 7,000 330,594
Future Tenant SF retail fine dining fast food theatre grocery office specialty
Restaurant - Building 31 8,110 8,110
Fast Casual - Building 31 2,484 2,484
Active Entertainment- Building 24 32,578 32,578 active entertainment with bowling alley
Fashion Retail- Building 23 south 3,139 3,139
Fashion Retail- Building 32 5,165 5,165
Subtotal Future Leases 51,476 8,304 8,110 2,484 0 0 0 32,578
Grand Total 382,070 101,488 80,502 10,318 59,500 55,288 35,396 39,578 382,070
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d)
Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding Restaurants Page 23
Shops at West End Tenant Mix
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8d) Title: Major Amendment to the Final PUD for the West End Redevelopment Project Regarding RestaurantsPage 24
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: August 19, 2013
Action Agenda Item: 8e
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.
Council Action: At the July 15, 2013 City Council meeting, the Council noted that the property
has a history of code violations. 3901 Excelsior Blvd is subject to a complaint filed in court by
the City for displaying one vehicle that is for sale by his dealership, known as Automotion. The
Council tabled consideration pending staffs review of compliance to the approved Conditional
Use Permit (CUP) which does not allow vehicles to be displayed or stored for anticipated sale.
Since the Council meeting, staff inspected the property four times, the first inspection was
immediately after the July 15, 2013 City Council meeting. Staff did not find a vehicle on this
site that is also listed for sale at any other location or website. The only violation noted was to
the temporary signage regulations. The property owner was notified of the violation.
Approved development: In 2011, the City approved a rezoning from C-1 to C-2 and a CUP
authorizing a motor vehicle service and repair station with a car wash. 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.
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 and Landscaping)
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) 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 August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) 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 August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) 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 August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) Page 5
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)
Aerial Photo
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) 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 August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) 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.
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.
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.
Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under
Section 26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of
proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties
above described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without
further formality.
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) Page 8
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)
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 August 19, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) Page 9
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)
EXCERPT OF 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 August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) 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 August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)Page 11
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)Page 12
CUP Exhibits
Proposed Building Elevations
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e)
Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)Page 13
City Council Meeting of August 19, 2013 (Item No. 8e) Title: Preliminary/Final Plat – Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921 Excelsior Blvd.)Page 14