HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013/02/25 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
FEBRUARY 25, 2013
6:00 p.m. DREAM ELEVATOR RIBBON CUTTING – 3601 Wooddale Avenue South
6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers
Discussion Items
1. 6:30 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 4 & March 11, 2013
2. 6:35 p.m. Hunt Associates’ Application for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Assistance
in Connection with the Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
3. 7:05 p.m. City Hall Renovation Update Project No. 2009-1600
4. 7:50 p.m. Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
5. 8:20 p.m. City Council Workshop Follow-Up
9:05 p.m. Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
9:10 p.m. Adjourn
Written Reports
6. Highway 100 Project Update
7. SW LRT Update
8. Background Checks Ordinance Amendment
9. January 2013 Monthly Financial Report
10. Extension of Xcel and CPE Franchise Ordinances
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: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 4 & March 11, 2013
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for
the Special Study Session scheduled for March 4, 2013 and the regularly scheduled Study
Session on March 11, 2013.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agendas as proposed?
SUMMARY: At each study session approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next
study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the tentative agenda and proposed
discussion items for the Special Study Session scheduled for March 4, 2013 and the regularly
scheduled Study Session on March 11, 2013.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 4 & 11, 2013
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 4 & March 11, 2013
Special Study Session, March 4, 2013 – 7:00 p.m.
Tentative Discussion Items
1. Creation of Environment & Sustainability Commission Update – Administrative Services (30 minutes)
Review of proposal for the creation of a new commission based on the recommendations of
the Environment/Sustainability Task Force.
Reports
2. Project Update - Sanitary Sewer (MCES Hopkins Interceptor Rehabilitation)
End of Meeting: 7:30 p.m.
Study Session, March 11, 2013 – 6:30 p.m.
Tentative Discussion Items
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
2. Liquor Ordinance – License & Requirements Review – Administrative Services (45 minutes)
Discussion of the City’s current regulations on liquor licenses, including the categories,
regulations, and numbers of liquor licenses.
3. Storm Water Follow-Up – Pond Treatments – Public Works (45 minutes)
Provide Council with information regarding the proposed treatment of 6 identified water
bodies in the city:
• Possible and recommended treatment methods
• Impacts (pros / cons) associated with possible treatment methods
• Estimated treatment costs
• Proposed treatment program
• Implementation process and next steps (to include public involvement)
4. Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway Plan Update – Public Works (30 minutes)
Review with Council the revised plan, proposed next steps, and project funding.
5. Proposed Stormwater CIP – Public Works (30 minutes)
Discuss the recently proposed stormwater Capital Improvement Program and associated
funding.
6. Communications/Meeting Check-In – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session
agenda for the purposes of information sharing.
Reports
7. Extension of Xcel & CenterPoint Energy Franchise Ordinances
8. Housing Authority Annual Report and Goals
9. Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Annual Report and Goals
10. Ordinance to Remove Sections of City Code Pertaining to Licensing of Facilities
11. Healthy Eating Active Living Policy
End of Meeting: 9:10 p.m.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Hunt Associates’ Application for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Assistance in
Connection with the Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff wishes to review and receive feedback on Hunt
Associates’ application for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance in connection with the
redevelopment of 6800 Cedar Lake Road (former Eliot School property). Specific issues staff
wishes to discuss include:
• Conformance of the proposed project plans with the adopted Design Guidelines
• Project economics/amount of TIF assistance
• Compliance with the EDA’s TIF Policy
• Next steps
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA preliminarily support Hunt Associates’
proposed Eliot Park project and is it willing to consider entering into a redevelopment contract
for the provision of $1.1 million in tax increment financing assistance to facilitate the project?
SUMMARY: Hunt Associates has a purchase agreement with Independent School District 283
to acquire 6800 Cedar Lake Road (the former Eliot School property). The firm proposes to
construct a $25 million residential development on the site consisting of 138 market rate
apartment units and 2 single family homes. Given the extraordinary costs of redeveloping the
site it is clear the proposed project cannot proceed without financial assistance. In order to move
the project forward in conformance with the neighborhood design guidelines it is proposed that
$1.1 million in pay-as-you-go tax increment assistance be provided over a period of 6.5 years.
As a reminder, should the EDA direct staff to pursue the project further, the EDA is not
obligating itself to providing the proposed assistance at this time.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed Eliot Park project is
conservatively estimated to add $16.5 million to the City’s tax base following completion. As a
result, the project would generate roughly $300,000 in tax increment annually. In order for Eliot
Park to move forward, it is proposed that the EDA consider the provision of $1.1 million in pay-
as-you-go tax increment from a newly formed redevelopment TIF district. The assistance is
necessary to offset some of the extraordinary costs of redeveloping the site. Once the TIF note is
paid off the property taxes from Eliot Park would accrue to the local taxing jurisdictions. The
City’s share is projected to be $100,000 annually.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
2-20-13 Planning Commission Staff Report: Eliot Park Apts
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: In anticipation of redevelopment of the former Eliot School property, design
guidelines for the site were proactively developed with the Eliot neighborhood in 2010. The
process of creating the design guidelines included extensive neighborhood input, including a
neighborhood committee that reviewed and recommended the final design guidelines document
to the City Council. The City Council adopted the design guidelines document by reference into
the Comprehensive Plan.
The St. Louis Park School District listed the Eliot School property for sale in 2011, and Eliot
Park Apartments, LLC (Hunt Associates and “redeveloper”) entered into a purchase agreement
with the School District to acquire the site for $2,075,000 in early 2012. The purchase price is
based on an independent appraisal prepared for the school district. It is also consistent with
estimates provided by an appraiser hired by the City to evaluate the property’s value as part of
the City search for the fire station sites.
The redeveloper held a neighborhood meeting on July 17, 2012 to obtain input on the proposed
project. Following the neighborhood meeting, the City Council reviewed the proposal at a Study
Session on July 23rd.
Site Conditions:
Located just north of Cedar Lake Road between Idaho and Hampshire Avenues, the proposed
redevelopment site is surrounded on all sides by single family homes. The site is 4.39 acres in
size and features a 66,856 square foot, multi-level former school building. There is also a
playground on the northern portion of the site. In its current condition the school building is not
reusable and has been vacant for several years. It was determined to be structurally substandard
in a 2012 inspection analysis by LHB, Inc. In the last year the building has been subject to
vandalism. While the building has been properly secured, the longer it remains vacant the
greater the likelihood the building will become a nuisance and a blighting influence in the
neighborhood. For this reason, the City’s preference is to see the building removed as soon as
possible.
Development Proposal:
The proposed development plan by Hunt Associates calls for razing the existing school building
and constructing a total of 140 housing units (138 market rate apartment units in two buildings
and two single family homes) on the property. The south apartment building would have 72
units and the north building would have 66 units. Both buildings would feature underground
parking and would be staggered in height with two and three stories so as to blend into the
surrounding single family neighborhood. The proposed two single family home lots at the north
end of the site would be sold to a different development group, although Hunt Associates would
be consulted about the homes’ design. The proposed site plan includes areas for a stormwater
pond; sidewalks; landscaping; and small children’s play area.
Parking for residents would be provided underground, with additional guest parking on a private
street between the two buildings. The current site plan shows a total of 200 parking stalls; which
is 13 more than required under the Zoning Ordinance. All proposed parking spaces are
accommodated on-site; no on-street parking is included in the above parking calculation
(although there are an additional 40 on-street stalls next to the site).
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
The redeveloper has agreed to comply with the requirements of the City’s Green Building
Policy, and as a result Eliot Park will incorporate numerous sustainable building elements and be
served by mass-transit.
Hunt envisions commencing the project this summer and taking approximately a year to
construct. Eliot Park would ideally be open for occupancy by fall 2014.
The Redeveloper
Hunt Associates, LLC, (a full service real estate development company) is headquartered in.
Minneapolis. It is led by Dan Hunt who has significant experience building and renovating
apartments, condominiums, townhouses and commercial properties in stand-alone and mixed use
developments throughout the Twin Cities. Mr. Hunt has served on numerous real estate-related
boards of directors and public policy committees in the metro area.
Mr. Hunt filed for Chapter 11 protection in June of 2010 to prevent two projects from going into
foreclosure when the condominium market declined. In the summer of 2011 Hunt received
unanimous approval of all of his creditor committees for the reorganization plan which allowed
him to continue operating his real estate development activities, maintain ownership of all of his
assets and to pay his creditors based on the schedule in the reorganization plan.
Mr. Hunt emerged from the above proceedings with a significantly stronger balance sheet and
better cash flow which has enabled him to concurrently pursue three new developments in
Minneapolis, Edina and St. Louis Park. Eliot Park would be Mr. Hunt’s 12th project.
Market Demand
Substantial apartment development activity is currently occurring within the Twin Cities; in fact,
it is at a 21-year high. While all the proposed projects won’t be built simultaneously, demand
continues to outpace new construction, according to industry experts. The recently released
NorthMarq Compass Report states “the multi-family market should continue to be robust as
demand for apartments is expected to remain strong, especially for core urban markets and select
in-fill sites in first-tier suburbs”. Upon consulting Maxfield Research, Hunt Associates is
confident that market demand will be sufficiently strong for Eliot Park given its location along
Cedar Lake Road, proximity to The West End, I-394 and mass transit, as well as the quality units
and amenities proposed within the building.
Land Use and Zoning Requirements
On December 17, 2012 the City Council adopted a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Map to allow for High Density Residential on the subject property. The proposed
project conforms to the required land use. The redeveloper has applied for the necessary
rezoning, CUP and PUD approvals. A public hearing at the Planning Commission was held
Wednesday, February 20th. The zoning applications will also require approval by the City
Council. The staff report for the Planning Commissions public hearing is attached.
Design Guidelines
Design guidelines for the potential redevelopment of the Eliot School property were prepared in
conjunction with the Eliot neighborhood during the summer and fall of 2010. The resulting Eliot
Community Center Site Reuse Study / Design Guidelines were formally adopted in 2011 and
have been adopted by reference into the City’s Comprehensive Plan through the adoption of the
Plan by Neighborhood Chapter.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
At the June 13, 2011 City Council Study Session, the possibility of providing tax increment
financing assistance for a redevelopment project on the Eliot School site was discussed. The
EDA/City Council concluded that it would be willing to consider providing TIF assistance for a
quality project that was consistent with the Eliot School Design Guidelines. It was also
acknowledged that any decision to provide TIF assistance would be dependent on the specific
characteristics of the project being proposed and a thorough evaluation of the financial need for
assistance
Hunt Associates’ proposed Eliot Park project is consistent with the majority of the standards
listed in the Design Guidelines. Eliot Park meets key design guideline objectives including:
1. Mix of medium density residential land uses
2. Building placement, height, and frontage
3. Transition building heights across the site from South to North
4. Complement existing development scale and character
5. Neighborhood open space, landscaping and buffering
6. Vehicular access and circulation
7. Underground and surface parking
8. Pedestrian access and circulation
9. Community landmark and neighborhood gateway
The project also allows for the construction of two single family homes at the north end of the
site so to better blend into the surrounding single family neighborhood. Additionally a small
children’s playground (or “tot lot”) was incorporated at the north end of the project site. Early
concept plans showed the play area at the south end of the site and three single family lots. At
the request of the neighborhood the play area was relocated to the north end of the site
necessitating the elimination of one of the single family home lots. Overall, the proposed project
is high quality and further improves the aesthetic image along Cedar Lake Road
Developer’s Request for Financial Assistance
Constructing Eliot Park in conformance with the Design Guidelines is not economically feasible
without some financial assistance. Hunt Associates is seeking financial assistance specifically to
offset the extraordinary costs resulting from the unique nature of the site and meeting the Design
Guidelines. More specifically, Hunt has requested funding to help address the following:
1. Hazardous waste abatement and building demolition – The former school contains
asbestos and other hazardous waste that must be professionally abated before the 66,856
square foot building can be razed and removed.
2. Neighborhood Open Space and Building Heights- The twin guidelines of significant open
space and building height limits resulted in a two building solution with subsequent
additional costs stemming from two foundations, two separate garage entries and exits,
two roofs, and substantially more underground parking and landscaping.
3. Building Step-backs – In order to complement the neighborhood, the buildings have
numerous step-backs at the third story to make the buildings more consistent in scale with
the adjacent homes. This makes Eliot Park buildings more expensive to construct than
typical apartment buildings.
4. Pedestrian circulation and Neighborhood Amenity – A private street between Idaho and
Hampshire Avenues and the children’s outdoor recreation area (resulting in the loss of a
single family home lot) also resulted in additional expense. The private street and
sidewalks break-up the mass of the buildings and keep the development from being a
barrier to movement within the neighborhood.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Page 5
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
Upon analysis by Ehlers and Staff, and discussion with Hunt, a consensus was reached that $1.1
million in tax increment assistance would address the extra development costs described above
and allow the project to move forward. Providing assistance makes it possible to construct a
high quality project consistent with the Eliot Design Guidelines. This proposed amount is in-line
with other similar sized multi-family residential developments the EDA has previously assisted.
As a reminder, the tax increment would be generated by the project itself and would only be
provided once construction had been completed and the developer verifies that it had incurred
the qualified costs. The assistance would be paid over 6.5 years provided sufficient tax
increment from the project was available. The EDA would be obligated to provide assistance to
the project only to the extent that the project generates sufficient tax increment to make the bi-
annual payments.
Preliminary Pro Forma Analysis
Hunt Associates’ preliminary sources and uses statements, cash flow projections, and investor
rate of return (ROR) related to Eliot Park were reviewed by Staff and Ehlers. The estimates were
found to be reasonable and within industry standards for this type of redevelopment. Included in
the analysis is a proposed purchase price for the subject property of $2,075,000 which represents
approximately $15,000 per residential unit. According to both Ehlers and the City Assessor, the
proposed purchase price is reasonable and within market.
Without any TIF assistance, Hunt Associates’ project proforma reflects an average expected
cash-on-cash (COC) return of under-five (5) percent. According to Ehlers, industry standards for
COC returns is ten (10) percent in order for projects to raise equity and be financed. If the EDA
was to provide the proposed assistance, it is estimated the development will attain an average
COC return of approximately ten (10) percent.
TIF Note
If the Council desires to move forward with this project, staff and Ehlers is recommending
providing Hunt Associates’ a pay-as-you -go TIF Note in the amount of $1.1 million to assist the
project in attaining the above returns. It will take approximately one year to construct Eliot
Park. The first increment would be paid in 2015. Given current estimates of market value, it is
expected the project’s TIF note would be paid off in approximately six and a half (6.5) years (on
a net present value basis). The Note would end with final payment on August 1, 2021. The
proposed project would be financed on a "pay-as-you -go" basis, which is the desired financing
method under the City's TIF Policy. The Note would bear interest at 5%, which is the
developer’s proposed bank financing rate for the project. The size of the TIF Note is based upon
no inflationary value in the project (as with all projects). This is more conservative estimating
and thus it is anticipated that the pay-as-you-go note will be paid off earlier than the estimated
six and a half (6.5) years. As with most of the City’s redevelopment contracts, the Redeveloper
will be required to execute a Minimum Assessment Agreement for the value utilized for
projecting the amount of TIF assistance available.
TIF District
The subject site is within the City’s Redevelopment Project Area which is the portion of the city
where the EDA may establish TIF districts. A new tax increment financing district would have
to be established for the Eliot Park project as the means for capturing the tax increment needed to
pay for the assistance for the redevelopment. A Redevelopment District would be the
appropriate type of TIF district for the proposed project. It would allow up to 26 years of tax
increment. The proposed TIF district would include two parcels: 6800 Cedar Lake Rd (former
school site) and 6720 Cedar Lake Rd (adjacent parking lot) along with the surrounding streets.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Page 6
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
Property Value and Taxes
Currently, the subject property is tax exempt and is therefore not generating any property tax
revenue. With the transfer of the school property to the redeveloper the property becomes
taxable. The estimated market value placed upon the property prior to redevelopment is
approximately $2 million. The estimated market value of the property upon redevelopment for
TIF estimation purposes would be approximately $16,560,000. Based upon a base value of $2
million, it is estimated that the City will receive approximately $12,500 in tax revenue to its
general fund starting in 2014 (if the property is sold prior to July 1, 2013). It is estimated that
Eliot Park would generate approximately $303,000 in property taxes annually after construction
is completed. Most of this will be captured as tax increment and used to make payments on the
TIF Note until it is paid off and the TIF district is terminated. Upon termination of the TIF Note,
it is estimated that the City’s portion of the $303,000 in taxes will be approximately $100,000.
It should be noted that the value of the project could be much higher than the estimated
$16,560,000 once it is assessed for tax purposes. This was a conservative value utilized only for
estimating the amount of TIF the project would generate (value could be as high as $19.3
million). If the value at the time of completion is higher than the estimated amount, the principal
amount of the TIF Note does not increase. The only impact would be that the TIF Note would
likely be paid back sooner than the anticipated six and a half (6.5) years. Local taxing
jurisdictions would receive the benefit of having the full value for tax purposes sooner than
anticipated, with the City’s portion of the taxes that go to the General Fund being higher than the
estimated $100,000 (approximately $116,000).
Look Back Provision
Consistent with other recent redevelopment projects with which the EDA has been involved,
Hunt Associates would be expected to agree to a "look back" provision in a future redevelopment
contract with the EDA for this project. Per the contract, the Redeveloper would be required to
submit a final proforma detailing actual costs of the development upon completion and lease up
of the building. This will allow the EDA to calculate the profit return to the Redeveloper and
any profits exceeding the agreed to industry standard would be split between the Redeveloper
and the EDA which would then reduce the amount of TIF assistance provided. This is an
important provision as it ensures that if the project cash flows at a higher rate than currently
projected, the EDA shares economically in the success of the project by reducing its obligation to
provide assistance.
Conformance and Analysis under the City’s TIF Policy
The proposed Eliot Park project meets the following housing-related goals as outlined in the
city’s TIF Policy:
• Provides a balanced and sustainable housing stock to meet diverse needs both today
and in the future.
• Promotes neighborhood stabilization and revitalization by the removal of blight and
the upgrading of existing housing stock.
The proposed project meets the following “Desired Qualifications” as outlined in the TIF Policy:
• It creates a higher ratio of property taxes paid before and after redevelopment and
provides a significant increase in tax base.
• It redevelops an underutilized property.
• The Redeveloper has demonstrated that the project plan is not financially feasible
“but-for” the use of tax increment financing.
• The Redeveloper is able to demonstrate past general development capability as well
as specific capability in the type and size of development proposed.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Page 7
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
In addition to the above, the proposed project could have the following additional benefits:
• Removes a vacant, structurally obsolete building that is increasingly becoming a
blighting nuisance within the neighborhood.
• Intensifies the subject property’s usage with an attractive residential development.
• Incorporates design features consistent with the Eliot Design Guidelines.
• Complements and integrates with the surrounding neighborhood.
• Incorporates modern interpretations of traditional architectural principles.
• Further strengthens and diversifies the housing options available in the St. Louis Park
market.
• Helps stabilize the retail businesses at the corner of Louisiana Ave and Cedar Lake
road by increasing the potential customer base.
• Incorporates Livable Communities and Transit Oriented Design principles.
• Incorporates Green Building design and features.
Grading under City’s TIF Report Card
Hunt Associates’ TIF Application was evaluated according to the grading scale provided within
the City’s TIF Policy. The project was graded as follows:
• Promotes housing for large families.
The residential units in the development will cater to the demands of the market
which is for smaller units. However the developer has agreed to incorporate 6 three-
bedroom units as well as two single family home lots. As percentage of the total
number of units within the project these units represent less than 10% which garnered
a grade of “D” under the Policy.
• Provides economic integration of rental or ownership projects.
Of the proposed 140 residential units, none would be designated as low income;
therefore a grade of “F” was provided.
• Ratio of soft costs to Total Project Costs.
Soft costs of the total project were estimated at approximately $2.7 million, or less
than 15% of the total development costs, therefore a grade of “A” was provided.
• Ratio of private to public (TIF) financing.
$25 million in private development costs to $1.1 million in TIF which equals a $23
private / $1 public ratio which garnered an “A” on the scale.
• The value of the site before and after redevelopment
The estimated market value of the property is approximately $2 million. The
projected market value upon redevelopment is: $16,560,000. This is a ratio of $1:$8
which equaled an “A” on the scale.
The proposed project received bonus points for: redeveloping a blighted property, adding value
to the neighborhood, incorporating principles of livable communities and environmental
sustainability, being located in one of the city’s Corridor Study Areas, and having a positive
community impact.
Upon calculation of all applicable factors and bonus points, Hunt Associates’ proposed project
received a final grade of “B” according to the scale within the Policy.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Page 8
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property
Conformance with the City’s Business Subsidy Policy
Any TIF assistance provided the proposed project would be exempt from state business subsidy
requirements as it relates to housing, pollution control/abatement, and redevelopment (Section
116J.993, Subdivision 3). Therefore, no public subsidy hearing would be required; however, the
EDA would still be subject a modified reporting requirements.
Summary
Hunt Associates’ proposed Eliot Park project is consistent with the majority of the principles
listed in the Eliot Community Center Site Reuse Study / Design Guidelines adopted in 2011. It
removes a blighted building that has become a nuisance, puts the property to more productive
use and further diversifies the city’s housing stock. Of the 140 residential units to be
constructed, the redevelopment would incorporate six 3-bedroom units and two single family
home lots which are desired for attracting families. The proposed project is high quality, blends
into the surrounding area and accommodates numerous design requests by the neighborhood.
Visually, it would further improve the aesthetic image along Cedar Lake Road. Furthermore, the
proposed project would yield a significant increase in market value thereby increasing the City’s
tax capacity. Local residents will financially benefit from the sale of the property since the land
sale proceeds accrue to their school district which will also benefit from future property tax
revenue. In essence, St. Louis Park residents have a double benefit from this project since it
financially benefits them both as school district and City taxpayers.
NEXT STEPS:
As with all such TIF applications it is at the EDA’s discretion as to whether it wishes to provide
financial assistance at the proposed level. If the EDA/Council is interested in moving forward on
this project as proposed, staff would begin negotiating business terms with Hunt Associates for a
proposed Redevelopment Contract. Such terms would be brought back to the EDA for its review
at a subsequent study session and would require formal approval. Staff would also begin the
process of establishing the proposed TIF district. The first step of which would be to establish
the public hearing date.
Planning Commission
Meeting Date: February 20, 2013
Agenda Item #3A
3A. Request for a Rezoning, Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development,
Conditional Use Permit, Lot Width and Lot Area Variances, and Preliminary
and Final Plat for Eliot Park Apartments
Location: 6720 & 6800 Cedar Lake Road
Applicant: Hunt Associates
Case No.: 13-02-Z, 13-03-S, 13-04-PUD, 13-06-CUP, 13-13-V
Recommended
Action:
• Chair to close public hearing.
• Motion to recommend approval, with conditions, of:
- Rezoning a portion of 6800 Cedar lake Road from R-2
Single Family Residence to R-4 Multiple Family
Residence;
- Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) for 6800
Cedar Lake Road to allow modifications to the front and
side yards, floor area ratio, height, and density.
- Conditional Use Permit for 6800 Cedar Lake Road to allow
multiple family dwellings and more than one principal
building on a lot;
- Variances from the lot width and lot area requirements for
the two proposed single family lots; and
- Preliminary Plat to subdivide the property.
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL:
The proposed development consists of two new apartment buildings with a total of 138 units,
underground parking, and three new single family lots at the Eliot School site. The existing
school building would be razed. The south apartment building (Building A) would have 72
apartments, and the north apartment building (Building B) would have 66 apartments.
The proposed buildings are mostly three stories in height, and reduced to two stories in some
areas. The proposed site plan includes areas for stormwater management, outdoor recreation,
and landscaping. Parking for residents would be provided underground, with additional guest
parking on a private street between the two buildings.
The site plan was designed to allow for additional setback area to the north of the site. There is
adequate space to the north of the apartments for the development of three new single family
lots. As proposed, one lot faces Hampshire and two lots face Idaho. Together with the
apartment buildings, a total of 141 new residential units are proposed for the site. The overall
density of the site would be 33 units per acre.
Alternate Site Plan (attached): The applicant notified staff recently that he intends to
modify the application in response to input received at a neighborhood meeting on
February 6, 2013. The changes would eliminate one of the single family lots, move the
proposed play area from the south side to the north side of the site, and remove the off-site
parking area located at 6720 Cedar Lake Road. An updated site plan was submitted to city
staff on February 14, 2013, that reflected these changes, but the proposed changes have not
been carried throughout the civil, architectural, landscaping drawings.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 9
The site plan and subdivision analysis is based upon the plan dated January 21, 2013, and
does not address the Alternate Site Plan. The Alternate Site Plan would reduce the overall
density, eliminate the need for variances, and generally responds to the requests made by
neighbors at most recent neighborhood meeting. Therefore, Planning Commission should
proceed with the public hearing. It may be appropriate defer action on the Final PUD at
this time. The Planning Commission could review the fully updated Final PUD drawings
and make recommendation at a later meeting. Public hearings are not required for the
Final PUD.
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
Comprehensive Plan: High Density Residential (RH)
Current Zoning: R2 Single Family Residence District
Proposed Zoning: R4 Multiple Family Residence District
Property Area: 186,101 square feet or 4.27acres (net area)
Existing Use: Former Eliot School building and grounds
REZONING:
The proposed apartment parcel (Lot 1, Block 1, Eliot Park Apartments) is guided for High
Density Residential which allows densities up
to 75 units per acre. The applicant requests a
rezoning to R4 Multiple Family Residence
residential zoning district over the apartment
parcel. The R4 District generally allows
densities up to 30 units per acre, and City
Council may allow higher densities with a
Planned Unit Development (PUD).
The rezoning to R4 is appropriate and
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
designation. Staff recommends approval of
the rezoning contingent upon Metropolitan
Council approval of the Comprehensive Plan
amendment. The Metropolitan Council is
expected to act on the matter on either March
27, 2013 or April 10, 2013. Staff does not
anticipate any complications with the
amendment.
SITE PLAN REVIEW:
The following analysis focuses on the proposed apartment site and assumes the zoning is
changed to R4 Multiple Family Residential as requested by the applicant. The proposal meets
most requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Some modifications to the standards may be
approved with a Planned Unit Development (PUD).
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 10
Zoning Compliance Table.
Architectural Design
Description
The proposed building ranges from two to three stories in height. The approximate height of the
three-story portions of the building is approximately 38 feet. However, the south building
(Building A) has one portion near Cedar Lake Road and Hampshire Avenue that is 47 feet above
grade. This is due in part to the sloping grade of the property, but it is also taller than any other
part of the building. An increase over the 40 feet height maximum may be allowed with a
Planned Unit Development and is one of the modifications requested by the applicant.
The design incorporates several walk up units on the first floor facing the surrounding streets and
the private driveway between the buildings. The proposed development follows the height,
Factor Allowed/Required Proposed Met?
Use Multiple Family Residence 138-unit apartment complex Yes
Lot Area 2.0 acres for a PUD 3.65 acres (apartment lot only) Yes
Density 50 units/acre, more with a
PUD at City Council
discretion if consistent with
Comprehensive Plan
38 units/acre (apartment lot only),
33 units/acre (excluding r-o-w only)
Yes
Height 3 stories or 40 ft.; more with
PUD
Ranges from 2 - 3 stories, and
27.5 ft. – 47 ft. (PUD modification
required)
Yes
Parking 187 stalls 200 off-street stalls, plus >40 on-
street stalls
Yes
Front Yard
(South)
None required with a PUD 17 feet
Yes
Rear Yard
(North)
None required with a PUD 59 ft. or more Yes
Side Yard
(East)
None required with a PUD
23 ft. or more
Yes
Side Yard
(West)
None required with a PUD 18 ft. or more Yes
Floor Area
Ratio
None with a PUD 0.92 Yes
Ground Floor
Area Ratio
0.35 with a PUD 0.34 (without the bonus for
underground parking, which reduces
the GFAR)
Yes
D.O.R.A. 19,096 square feet (12%) 21,817 or 13.7% Yes
Landscaping 138 trees 112 trees Yes
147 shrubs 432 shrubs, 1,074 perennials
Alternative landscaping Two courtyard patio spaces and
toddler play area
Stormwater Required city and watershed
standards
Stormwater management is provided Yes
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 11
massing, and articulation recommendations of the Eliot School Site Design Guidelines, and in
doing so minimizes the impacts of redevelopment on surrounding properties.
Materials
Building materials include brick, glass, cement board siding, metal panel, and burnish block. The
percentage of class I materials varies depending on the elevation. However, the plans included
in the packet are below the 60% class I materials required by City Code on every elevation.
The applicant has informally proposed some changes to the materials (substituting the burnished
block foundation with brick). According to the architect, that would bring most of the elevations
into compliance. However, even with that those changes the east and north elevations of the
north building (Building A) would be somewhat short of 60% required, while other elvations
would be closer to 70%.
Staff finds the plan does not meet the architectural material requirements and recommends that
the elevations be changed as needed to meet the minimum 60% class I requirement on each
building elevation as a condition of approval.
Parking
The zoning code requires 1 parking stall per bedroom for multiple family residential buildings.
The development has a total of 187 bedrooms and provides 200 off-site parking stalls. Off-street
parking is provided in a combination of 180 underground parking stalls and 20 surface parking
stalls. There are also more than 40 on-street parking stalls along Hampshire Avenue and Idaho
Avenue adjacent to the site. The underground garages include a total of 28 tandem parking stalls
and four ADA accessible parking stalls. The applicant intends to remove the existing paved
parking area on the lot at 6720 Cedar Lake Road, though the plans have not been updated to
show that change. The plan meets the zoning code parking requirements.
Utilities
The City Engineer reviewed the plans. Stormwater from the site will managed in a combination
of a pond, underground storage, and a swale. The proposed system meets the City’s rate control
requirements. The plan requires review and approval by the Bassett Creek and Minnehaha Creek
Watershed Districts. Permitting may be handled by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District alone,
if Bassett Creek Watershed is agreeable, since all the drainage is directed to the south side of the
property.
Grading
The proposed detention area along Cedar Lake Road results in a steep slope directly adjacent to
the sidewalk. It is recommended that the sloping be revised to provide a bench or buffer area
adjacent to the sidewalk for both snow storage and safety reasons. The final grading plan shall
be subject to approval of the City Engineer.
Traffic and Circulation:
A traffic study was conducted by SRF Consulting Group when the City reviewed the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The study was updated to reflect the reduction in the number
of units in the proposed development. An extract from the traffic study update is attached for
review.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 12
Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA)
The plan provides more than the required DORA as detailed in the Zoning Analysis Table. The
DORA includes two courtyard patio spaces with outdoor seating, a kids play area, and pedestrian
walkways connecting through the site.
Landscaping
The landscaping plan provides 81 deciduous canopy trees, 10 evergreen trees, and 43 ornamental
trees. There are also 432 shrubs and 1,043 perennials/grasses. Many of the plants selected are
native species. The planting are focused along the boulevards, pedestrian walkways, patios and
building foundations. The plan includes the use of alternative landscaping features, including a
rooftop patio and a patio area off of the lobby/lounge. Staff finds the plan meets the landscaping
requirements, with the use of the alternative landscaping provision.
Tree removal is included in the demolition plan. The proposed landscaping plan satisfies the
City’s tree replacement requirements.
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) OBJECTIVES:
The Zoning Code requires that applicants for a Planned Unit Development demonstrate how the
proposal will “enhance, support, and further the following objectives”:
1. Provide for integrated pedestrian facilities to and within the project:
The building siting, massing, articulation, orientation, façade entrances, sidewalks
connections and landscape features provide integrated pedestrian facilities to and within the
project.
2. Enhance linkages to mass transit facilities:
The site is served by Metro Transit routes 9, 649, and 663. Route 9 is classified a “frequently
operating transit line” under the zoning code. The plan also provides enhanced sidewalk
access along and across the site.
3. Incorporate implementation of travel demand management strategies as part of the PUD.
The purpose of a travel demand management strategy is to spread the number of automobile
trips throughout the day, reducing the negative impacts that occur during peak travel times.
Generally, office uses generate the greatest peak demand and can most influence these
impacts. This residential development distributes the traffic from the two buildings to
different streets and provides ample distance between Cedar Lake Road and the nearest
driveway entrances.
4. Provide public plazas and designed outdoor recreation area which exceeds minimum chapter
requirements:
The plan provides more than the designed outdoor recreation area (DORA) requirement to
provide 12% of the lot area.
5. Provide a high degree of aesthetics through overall design and display of public art:
The development includes a site plan that provides enhanced gathering spaces, sidewalks, a
visually interesting and human-scale development, and the required class I exterior building
materials on most of the building elevations.
In order to fully satisfy this requirement, staff recommends that materials on the east and
north elevations of Building B change as needed to meet the minimum 60% of class I
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 13
materials. Staff also recommends the site plan change to provide a setback of at least 25 feet
from the front lot line along Cedar Lake Road.
PUD MODIFICATIONS:
The application includes the following PUD modifications:
• Increased residential density from 30 units per acre to 37 units per acre on the apartment lot.
(The development as a whole has a density of 33 units per acre.)
• Increased Floor Area Ratio from 0.70 to 0.92
• Increased building height for the south building (Building A) to allow a portion of the
building to be 47 feet tall.
• Reduced front yard (south) to 25 feet;
• Reduced side yard (east) to 23 feet;
• Reduced side yard (west) to 18 feet;
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT:
A conditional use permit (CUP) is required for the multiple family residence in the R4 zoning
district and to allow two principal buildings on one lot.
The development meets all the requirements for a multiple family residence in the R4 district,
including:
1. The development has access to Cedar Lake Road, a minor arterial roadway, from both
Hampshire Avenue and Idaho Avenue. Traffic from the underground garages of each
building is directed to different roads to more evenly distribute traffic. Also, the south
garage entrance lines up with 22nd Street, providing yet another option for residents
existing the south building.
2. The plan provides 13.7% of the lot area for designed outdoor recreation area.
3. The average height of the buildings is 38 feet, and the spacing between the buildings
exceeds the minimum with 80 feet separation. This spacing also supports the CUP for
allowing two buildings on one lot.
4. Buildings are more than 15 feet from curbs of internal parking areas and driveways,
providing adequate space for landscaping and sidewalks.
5. Sidewalks of at least five feet are provided to building entrances from parking areas and
public streets.
The public hearing notice also included a CUP for off-site parking (the existing parking lot at
6720 Cedar Lake Road). The developer has subsequently decided to remove the parking lot
rather than improve it, so this CUP is no longer needed. Plans will be updated to show this
change prior to City Council consideration.
VARIANCE ANALYSIS:
The proposed Eliot Park Apartments subdivision includes two single family lots that do not meet
the current lot width and lot area requirements of the R2 Single Family Residence zoning district.
The applicant requests a variance from 60 feet to 50 feet on the lot width, and from 7,500 square
feet to 6,775 square feet on the lot area, for the two proposed single family lots front on Idaho
Ave South. The City may grant variances upon considering the impacts. Listed below are the
criteria and city staff findings.
1. The effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 14
The reduced lot width and lot area for each of the two proposed single-family lots will
not negatively impact the public’s health, safety, or welfare.
2. The request is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and,
The proposed reductions in lot area and lot width would still allow houses to be built that
meet the City’s minimum setback requirements. It may limit the overall sizes of the
houses to some extent, but that may work in favor of the new construction being more in
scale with the surrounding single family houses.
3. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
The resulting density of the smaller single family lots are still within the low density
residential Comprehensive Plan category of three to seven units per acre.
4. The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in
complying with the zoning ordinance.
The applicant is balancing the proposed density of the overall redevelopment of the Eliot
School site. Including single family lots adds a mix of housing types on the site and in
the neighborhood. The single family residential lots provide a lower density housing type
to buffer between the apartment building and existing single family houses to the north.
Also, there is a desire to maintain open space on the north side of the lot between the
apartments and the new single family lots.
The reduced lot width and size will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood.
There are two lots immediately north of the subject parcels with lot widths of 40 feet and
lot areas of 5,420 square feet. These existing lots are 10 feet narrower and 1,355 square
feet smaller than the proposed lots.
This site is also unique in that it is part of a larger redevelopment project that includes a
combination of single family and multiple family residential.
5. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant.
The variances would allow construction of two single family houses that are compatible
with the uses allowed in the R2 zoning district and with the scale of the lots located
abutting the site.
6. The granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the
adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets, increase
the danger of fire, or endanger public safety; and,
Granting the lot width and lot area variances for two of the proposed single family lots
will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably
increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, or endanger
public safety.
7. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant but
is necessary to alleviate a practical difficulty.
The variance assists the development to preserve the open space on the north side of the
apartment building, provide a buffer between the adjacent single family houses, and
provide a mix of residential uses and densities on the redevelopment site.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 15
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT:
The property currently includes two parcels. The main parcel is located at 6800 Cedar Lake
Road and includes the school building and grounds. There is a smaller parcel at 6720 Cedar lake
Road that is currently paved for overflow parking from the school site. The Eliot Park
Apartments plat would subdivide the 6800 Cedar Lake Road into four parcels and plat 6720
Cedar Lake Road into an outlot. The plat also dedicates right-of-way over Cedar Lake Road and
Hampshire Avenue South.
Lot Information:
Lot 1, Block 1 would be 159,131 square feet or 3.65 acres. The proposed use of this lot would
be two apartment buildings totaling 138-units. This lot meets the minimum requirements of the
proposed R4 zoning district.
Lot 2, Block 1 would be a new single family lot that is 60.05 feet wide, 135.50 feet deep, and
8,132 square feet or 0.19 acre in area. This lot meets the minimum requirements of the R2
zoning district.
Lot 3, Block 1 would be a new single family lot that is 50.02 feet wide, 135.50 feet deep, and
6,775 square feet or 0.16 acre in area. The proposed lot width is less than the 60 feet minimum
and the lot area is less than the 7,200 square feet minimum in the R2 District. Variances would
be required from both of these standards.
Lot 4, Block 1 would be a new single family lot that is 50.02 feet wide, 135.50 feet deep, and
6,775 square feet or 0.16 acre in area. The proposed lot width is less than the 60 feet minimum
and the lot area is less than the 7,200 square feet minimum in the R2 District. Variances would
be required from both of these standards.
Outlot A would be approximately 34.5 feet wide, 153.76 feet deep, and 5,287 square feet or 0.12
acre in area. The developer proposes to remove the pavement and landscape the site, rather than
use it for off-site parking, because it cannot meet current parking lot design requirements.
Finally, the plat would dedicate 18,199 square feet or 0.42 acres of right-of-way over Hampshire
Avenue South and Cedar Lake Road.
Utility Easements:
The proposed plat provides all the required drainage and utility easements along the perimeter of
the site, plus additional easements over the proposed stormwater system. The easements over the
private drainage systems provide the City with the right to access the facilities in case of
emergencies, but the private property owner must own and maintain the system. All utility
service lines must be buried.
Park & Trail Dedication
The Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission will meet February 20, 2013, to review the
plan. The development will be required pay park and trail dedication fees in lieu of land
dedication. The park dedication fee is $1,500 per dwelling unit, and the trail dedication fee is
$225 per unit.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 16
Due to the alternate site plan proposed, staff recommends approval of only the preliminary plat.
The final plat should be brought back to Planning Commission for review and recommendation
at a subsequent meeting, when all the plans have been updated.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
To date, the following meetings and communications have occurred:
• July 9, 2012: City Council Study Session Report on Development Proposal
• July 18, 2012: Neighborhood Input Meeting, held at the West End
• July 23, 2012: City Council Study Session Discussion
• August 9, 2012: Housing Authority Summary Review of Development
• August 16, 2012: Planning Commission Summary Review of Development
• September 19, 2012: Planning Commission Public Hearing
• October 15, 2012: Consideration by City Council and vote of 3-3 – request failed
• November 5, 2012: Vote to reconsider Comprehensive Plan Amendment
• November 19, 2012: Discussion by City Council at Study Session
• December 17, 2013: City Council approval of Comprehensive Plan Amendment
• January 16, 2013: Study Session with Planning Commission
• February 6, 2013: Neighborhood Input Meeting, held at the Municipal Service Center
In addition to the public hearing at the Planning Commission on February 20, 2013, the Parks
and Recreation Advisory Commission will review the plan and make a recommendation
regarding the parkland and trail dedication fees later that same evening.
The developer is also in the process of preparing their project’s financial pro-forma. It is
anticipated that the developer will seek tax-increment financing (TIF) assistance.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of rezoning the proposed apartment property at 6800 Cedar Lake
Road from R-2 Single Family Residence to R-4 Multiple Family Residence to be consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan designation of High Density Residential.
Staff recommends approval of the Eliot Park Apartments preliminary PUD for development of a
138-unit apartment complex at 6800 Cedar Lake Road and the modifications listed in the staff
report, subject to the following conditions:
1. The front yard building setback from Cedar Lake Road must be increased to at least
25 feet.
2. The exterior building material must be changed to provide a minimum of 60% class I
materials on each elevation of the building.
3. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the Final PUD official
exhibits.
4. Prior to issuance of building permits:
a. The developer shall sign the City’s Assent Form and the Official Exhibits.
b. Final plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and Zoning Administrator to
ensure that all proposed utilities and construction documents conform to the
requirements of the City Code of Ordinances and City policies.
c. The developer shall submit a financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter
of credit in the amount of 125% of the costs of public sidewalk installation,
repair/cleaning of public streets/utilities, landscaping, and designed outdoor
recreation area features.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 17
d. The City and developer shall enter into a planning development agreement.
5. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities (excluding building demolition), the
following conditions shall be met:
a. Proof of recording the final plat shall submitted to the City.
b. Building material samples and colors must be submitted to the City for review.
c. Assent Form and official exhibits must be signed by the applicant and owner.
d. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development,
construction, private utility, and City representatives.
e. All necessary permits must be obtained.
6. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no
construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through
Friday, and between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends.
b. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighborhood
properties.
c. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary.
d. The City shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a public
street. 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.
7. Prior to the issuance of any temporary or permanent occupancy permit the following
shall be completed:
a. Landscaping and irrigation shall be in accordance with the Official Exhibits.
b. Exterior building improvements shall be completed in accordance with the
Official Exhibits.
c. 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.
8. A total of 158 bicycle parking spaces are required. Bicycle parking shall be provided
in a combination of inside and outside the building as guided in the zoning code.
9. All trash handling and storage facilities shall be located inside the building.
10. No outside storage is permitted. Incidental outside storage shall be removed within
48 hours.
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit for 6800 Cedar Lake Road based on
findings in the staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the lot width and lot area setback variances for the proposed Lots
3 and 4, Block 1, ELIOT PARK APARTMENTS, based on the findings in the staff report.
Staff recommends approval of the ELIOT PARK APARTMENTS preliminary plat, subject to
the following conditions:
1. Park and trail dedication fees shall be paid prior to the City signing the final plat.
2. Approval of the preliminary plat is subject to City Council approval of the lot width
and lot area variances for Lots 3 and 4, Block 1.
3. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be
buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and
100% screened from off-site.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 18
4. The grading plan shall be amended to eliminate the steep slopes where the stormwater
pond is adjacent to public sidewalks.
5. The public sidewalks along Cedar Lake Road, Hampshire Avenue South and Idaho
Avenue South adjacent to the development shall be a minimum of six feet wide.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Alternate Site Plan
• Civil Engineering Plans
o Final Plat
o Preliminary Plat
o Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan
o Utility Plan
o Tree Preservation Plan
o Landscape Plan
• Architectural Plans
o Site Plan
o Floor Plans
o Building Elevations
• Extract of the Traffic Study Update
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 19
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Eliot Park Apartments, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, fee owner of the followingdescribed property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lots 4 to 28 inclusive, Richmond 3rd Addition, including vacated 22nd Street and that part of Section 8, Township 117, Range 21, described as follows:Commencing at a point on East line of West Half of Northeast Quarter, distant 534 feet South from Northeast corner thereof; thence West 157.5 feetto Northeast corner of Lot 19, Richmond 3rd Addition; thence South along said addition to center line of Cedar Lake Road; thence Northeasterly alongsame to East line of West Half of Northeast Quarter; thence North along said East line to point of beginning.And, that part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 117, Range 21, described as follows:Commencing at a point in the center line of Cedar Lake Road where the East line of the West Half of said Northeast Quarter intersects said centerline; thence Northeasterly along the center line of said Cedar Lake Road to a point 75 feet Northeasterly from the point of intersection of said East lineof said West Half of Northeast Quarter with the center of said Cedar Lake Road; thence North and parallel with the said East line of said West Half ofNortheast Quarter of said Section 8 to the center line of the vacated alley; thence Southwest parallel with the North line of said Cedar Lake Road 75feet more or less to the East line of said West Half of the Northeast Quarter; thence South along the East line of said West Half of Northeast Quarterto the point of beginning.(The registered portion of which is as follows:)Lots 25 and 27 in Richmond 3rd Addition,Lot 28, Richmond 3rd Addition,Lot 10, Richmond 3rd Addition.Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as ELIOT PARK APARTMENTS and does hereby donate and dedicate to the public for public useforever the public ways as shown on this plat.In witness whereof said Eliot Park Apartments, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this______ day of ____________________, 201_____.ELIOT PARK APARTMENTS, LLC____________________________ ____________________________Daniel Hunt Chief ManagerState of ________________County of ______________The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of ____________________, 201_____ by Daniel Hunt, Chief Mangager of Eliot ParkApartments, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company._________________________________________(Signature)_________________________________________(Printed Name)Notary Public ____________________ County______________My Commission Expires January 31, 201_____SURVEYORS CERTIFICATIONI, Richard L. Licht, do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the Stateof Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat;that all monuments depicted on this plat have been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined inMinnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all public ways are shown andlabeled on this plat.Dated this ______ day of __________________, 201______________________________________Richard L. Licht, Licensed Land SurveyorMinnesota License No. 26724State of MinnesotaCounty of HennepinThe foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 20_____ by Richard L. Licht, a Licensed LandSurveyor._________________________________________(Signature)_________________________________________(Printed Name)Notary Public Hennepin County, MinnesotaMy Commission Expires January 31, 201_____SAINT LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTAThis plat of ELIOT PARK APARTMENTS was approved and accepted by the City Council of Saint Louis Park, Minnesota, at a regular meeting thereof heldthis ______ day of _________________, 201_____. If applicable, the written comments and recommendations of the Commissioner of Transportationand the County Highway Engineer have been received by the City or the prescribed 30 day period has elapsed without receipt of such comments andrecommendations, as provided by Minn. Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2.CITY COUNCIL OF SAINT LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTABy __________________________________, Mayor By ______________________________, ClerkTAXPAYER SERVICES DEPARTMENT, Hennepin County, MinnesotaI hereby certify that taxes payable in 201______ and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat, dated this ________ day of____________________, 201_____.Mark V. Chapin, Hennepin County AuditorBy ________________________________, DeputySURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, MinnesotaPursuant to MN. STAT. Sec. 383B.565 (1969) this plat has been approved this ________ day of ______________________, 201_____.William P. Brown, Hennepin County SurveyorBy _________________________________REGISTRAR OF TITLES, Hennepin County, MinnesotaI hereby certify that the within plat of ELIOT PARK APARTMENTS was filed in this office this ___day of ____________, 201_____ , at __ o'clock __.m.Rachel Smith, Acting Registrar of TitlesBy ________________________________ DeputyCOUNTY RECORDER, Hennepin County, MinnesotaI hereby certify that the within plat of ELIOT PARK APARTMENTS was recorded in this office this ________ day of _____________________, 201_____,at ________o'clock __M.Rachel Smith, Acting County RecorderBy ________________________________ DeputyStudy SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 20
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 21
Professional Services:CADD Qualification:by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, othersmay be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawingor for completion of this project by others without written approvalshall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project,for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD filesare instruments of the Consultant professional servicesCADD files prepared by the Consultant for this projectConsultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities.deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify theat the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions orrevisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be madefiles for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentionalProfessional Signature:Quality Control:Sheet Title:Sheet No.:Project No.:Checked By:Project Lead:Review Date:Drawn By:Project Name:Owner/Developer Name:W:\2012\12307\CADD DATA\SURVEYPlotted: 01 /21 / 2013 1:39 PMVicinity Map:Revisions:Landscape Architecture EnvironmentalPlanning Civil Engineering Land Surveying20137200 Hemlock Lane - Suite 300Maple Grove, MN 55369Telephone: (763) 424-5505www.LoucksAssociates.com24 University Avenue NESuite 150Minneapolis, MN 55413SitePreliminary Plat of: ELIOT PARK APARTMENTSSheet 1 of 1--TMBRLL 12-27-12S12307-MASTER.DWG/Pre-Plat1-2-13 City Submittal1-21-13 City Re-SubmittalRichard L. Licht - PLS26724License No.DateI hereby certify that this survey, plan or report wasprepared by me or under my direct supervision and thatI am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the lawsof the State of Minnesota.Vicinity Map:12-27-12LEGAL DESCRIPTION:Lots 4 to 28 inclusive, Richmond 3rd Addition, including vacated 22nd Street and that part of Section 8,Township 117, Range 21, described as follows: Commencing at a point on East line of West Half of NortheastQuarter, distant 534 feet South from Northeast corner thereof; thence West 157.5 to Northeast corner of Lot19, Richmond 3rd Addition; thence South along said addition to center line of Cedar Lake Road; thenceNortheasterly along same to East line of West Half of Northeast Quarter; thence North along said East line topoint of beginning.And, that part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 8, Township 117, Range 21, described as follows:Commencing at a point in the center line of Cedar Lake Road where the East line of the West Half of saidNortheast Quarter intersects said center line; thence Northeasterly along the center line of said Cedar LakeRoad to a point 75 feet Northeasterly from the point of intersection of said East line of said West Half ofNortheast Quarter with the center of said Cedar Lake Road; thence North and parallel with the said East lineof said West Half of Northeast Quarter of said Section 8 to the center line of the vacated alley; thenceSouthwest parallel with the North line of said Cedar Lake Road 75 feet more or less to the East line of saidWest Half of the Northeast Quarter; thence South along the East line of said West Half of Northeast Quarter tothe point of beginning.Hennepin County, MinnesotaAbstract PropertyTorrens PropertyTorrens Certificate of Title No. 95156 (Lot 10, Richmond 3rd Addition)Torrens Certificate of Title No. 133800 (Lots 25 and 27, Richmond 3rd Addition)Torrens Certificate of Title No. 155930 (Lot 28, Richmond 3rd Addition)BENCHMARK:1. Top nut of hydrant located at the southeast corner of Hampshire Avenue and Cedar Lake Road. Elev. = 920.34feet.2. Top nut of hydrant located at the northwest corner of Idaho Avenue and 22nd street. Elev. = 910.61 feet.Elevations shown are based on NGVD 29 datum.AREAS:Lot 1, Block 1 = 159,131 Sq.Ft. or 3.65 AcresLot 2, Block 1 = 8,132 Sq.Ft. or 0.19 AcresLot 3, Block 1 = 6,775 Sq.Ft. or 0.16 AcresLot 4, Block 1 = 6,775 Sq.Ft. or 0.16 AcresOutlot A = 5,287 Sq.Ft. or 0.12 AcresNet Property Area = 186,101 Sq.Ft. or 4.27 AcresRight of way Dedication Area = 18,199 Sq.Ft. or 0.42 AcresTotal Property Area = 204,300 Sq.Ft. or 4.69 AcresEXISTING ZONING 150 feet Perimeter Surrounding Site:Zone (R-2) - Single Family ResidentialEXISTING ZONING:Zone (R-2) - Single Family ResidentialPROPOSED ZONING:Zone (R-4) - Multiple Family Residential - Lot 1Zone (R-2) - Single Family Residential - Lots 2, 3 and 4MINIMUM BUILDING SETBACKS for R4 Zoning:Front = 30 FeetSide (Corner) = 15 FeetSide (Interior) = 15 Feet on one side - half building height on the otherRear = 25 FeetMINIMUM BUILDING SETBACKS for R2 Zoning:Front = 25 FeetSide (Corner) = 15 FeetSide (Interior) = 5 and 7 FeetRear = 25 FeetNOTES:1.) The Boundary and Topographic survey shown hereon is from the Survey prepared by Sunde Land Surveying datedJuly 13, 2011.2.) The property depicted on this survey and the easements of record shown hereon are the same as the property andthe easements described in the Commitment for Title Insurance issued by Commercial Partners Title InsuranceCompany, LLC, as agent for Old Republic National Title Insurance Company File No. 35605 First Supplemental,dated December 4, 2012.Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 22
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 23
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 24
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 25
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 26
Scale: 1"= 20'-0"SITE PLAN1Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 27
Scale:1" = 20'GARAGE PLAN A1Scale:1" = 20'FIRST FLOOR PLAN A2Scale:1" = 20'SECOND FLOOR PLAN A3Scale:1" = 20'THIRD FLOOR PLAN A4Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 28
Scale: 1" = 20'GARAGE PLAN B1Scale: 1" = 20'FIRST FLOOR PLAN B2Scale: 1" = 20'SECOND FLOOR PLAN B3Scale: 1" = 20'THIRD FLOOR PLAN B4Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 29
SOUTH ELEVATION BUILDING 'A'EAST ELEVATION BUILDING 'A'NORTH ELEVATION BUILDING - 'A'SOUTH ELEVATION BUILDING - 'B' SIMMATERIAL INDEXALUMINUM STOREFRONTSYSTEMSTONE SILLDECORATIVE CMUPREFIN. METAL CORNICE/CAPFLASHINGFACE BRICK(COLOR TBD)CEMENT BD. SIDINGRANDOM WIDTHS (COLOR TBD)CEMENT BD. PANEL SIDING #2(COLOR TBD)PREFIN. METAL PANEL #1(78" VERT. CORR. - EXPOSED FAST. W/ 2" FRM TRIM)PREFIN. ALUMINUM RAILINGVINYL WINDOWSCEMENT BD. PANEL SIDING #1(COLOR TBD)PREFIN. METAL FLASHINGWEST ELEVATION BUILDING 'A'Scale:1/8"=1 '-0"ELEVATION1Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"ELEVATION2Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"ELEVATION4Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"ELEVATION3Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 30
NORTH ELEVATION BUILDING B'WEST ELEVATION BUILDING 'B'MATERIAL INDEXALUMINUM STOREFRONTSYSTEMSTONE SILLDECORATIVE CMUPREFIN. METAL CORNICE/CAPFLASHINGFACE BRICK(COLOR TBD)CEMENT BD. SIDINGRANDOM WIDTHS (COLOR TBD)CEMENT BD. PANEL SIDING #2(COLOR TBD)PREFIN. METAL PANEL #1(78" VERT. CORR. - EXPOSED FAST. W/ 2" FRM TRIM)PREFIN. ALUMINUM RAILINGVINYL WINDOWSCEMENT BD. PANEL SIDING #1(COLOR TBD)PREFIN. METAL FLASHINGEAST ELEVATION BUILDING - 'B'Scale:1/8"=1 '-0"ELEVATION1Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"ELEVATION2Scale:1/8" = 1'-0"ELEVATION3Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 31
Extract from Eliot Park Traffic Update by SRF
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The proposed development is located north of Cedar Lake Road, between Idaho Avenue and
Hampshire Avenue. As shown in Figure 3, the proposed plan includes replacing the existing
Eliot School building with a 138-unit apartment complex. It should be noted that there is the
potential for up to three additional single-family lots proposed. The proposed development also
includes an underground parking facility for residents, a surface parking lot for short-term/visitor
parking and an access site driveway provided along Idaho Avenue and Hampshire Avenue. In
addition, there is a driveway connecting Idaho Avenue and Hampshire Avenue that is expected
to primarily serve short-term and visitor parking. When compared to the primary residential
driveways for the proposed development, the driveway between Idaho Avenue and Hampshire
Avenue is not expected to be significantly utilized.
SIGHT DISTANCE REVIEW
Site access to the proposed development is being provided along Idaho Avenue and Hampshire
Avenue. Therefore, observations were conducted as part of the Traffic Review of the Proposed
Fire Station Two (dated March 14, 2008) to determine if adequate sight distance is available for
the southbound approaches of Idaho Avenue and Hampshire Avenue to allow vehicles to safely
access Cedar Lake Road. According to current road design standards, a decision-reaction time of
eight seconds is desirable, based on the 35-mph speed limit on Cedar Lake Road. Five
observations were conducted at both intersections. Based on the measurements taken in the field,
the sight distances observed for vehicles exiting from Idaho Avenue and Hampshire Avenue are
presented in Table 4. Since the sight distance for both intersections for the southbound
approaches is greater than the acceptable threshold of eight seconds, sight distance is not
considered an issue for these intersections. Furthermore, there were no reported crashes over the
most recent three-year period (2009-2011) at either of these intersections.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 32
0127879February 2013Eliot Park Traffic StudyFigure 3Proposed Site PlanCity of St. Louis ParkH:\Projects\7879\TS\Figures\Fig03_Site Plan.cdrNORTHNorthStudy SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2) Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School PropertyPage 33
Table 4
Sight Distance Observations
Intersection/ Approach Sight Distance
Idaho Avenue
Southbound Approach – Looking East 10 sec.
Southbound Approach – Looking West 10 sec.
Hampshire Avenue
Southbound Approach – Looking East 10 sec.
Southbound Approach – Looking West 15 sec.
It should be noted that local residents along Cedar Lake Road have expressed concern regarding
sight-distance from their respective residential driveways. However, individual driveways were
not reviewed as part of this traffic study and additional review would be required to determine if
adequate site distance exists. In general, it is common to have individual driveways that do not
meet typical site distance guidelines, particularly in established neighborhoods, since mitigation
can be a significant impact and/or expensive.
TRAFFIC FORECASTS
Construction of the proposed development is expected to be completed in the year 2013.
Therefore, traffic forecasts for build conditions were developed for year 2014 build conditions
(one year after construction). These forecast volumes take into account background growth on
the adjacent roadway system and estimated trips generated by the proposed development. To
account for general background growth in the area, an annual growth rate of one-half percent
was applied to the existing peak hour volumes to develop year 2014 background traffic forecasts.
This growth rate is consistent with historical growth rates in the area since 2001 (based on
MnDOT AADT volumes).
To account for traffic impacts associated with the proposed development, trip generation
estimates for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours and a daily basis were developed. Trip generation
estimates for the proposed apartment complex were developed using the ITE Trip Generation
Manual, 8th Edition. Table 5 shows the expected trip generation for the proposed development,
including the three single-family lots previously mentioned.
Table 5
Trip Generation Estimates
Land Use Type (ITE Code)
Size
(Dwelling
Units)
A.M. Peak
Hour Trips
P.M. Peak
Hour Trips Daily
TripsIn Out In Out
Apartment (220) 138 14 56 56 30 918
Single-Family Housing (210)3 122129
Total15585831947
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 34
Based on the trip generation estimates, the proposed development is expected to generate 73 a.m.
peak hour trips, 89 p.m. peak hour trips, and 947 daily trips. It should be noted that the ITE rate
used (based on the number of dwelling units) equates to an average of approximately two
persons per unit. The proposed development trips were distributed throughout the study area
based on the directional distribution shown in Figure 4. The directional distribution was
developed using a combination of existing travel patterns and historical AADT volumes within
the area. Figure 5 displays the a.m. and p.m. peak hour site generated trips at the main access
locations. The combination of background traffic and trips generated by the proposed
development, which represents the year 2014 build traffic volumes, is shown in Figure 6.
Trip Generation Comparison
Since Eliot School was constructed in 1926 and expanded in 1952, several tenants have used the
building. In more recent years, the building has been occupied by a combination of Independent
School District 287 and other academies, but was vacated in 2010. However, to provide a
comparison between the previous Eliot School land uses versus the proposed apartment complex,
trip generation rates for each land use were reviewed. For purposes of this comparison, the
school was assumed to have a maximum student capacity of 528 students, which was provided
by City staff.
Results of the trip generation comparison use ITE rates shown in Table 6 indicates that the
proposed development will generate significantly less trips during the a.m. peak hour, a similar
amount of trips during the p.m. peak hour, and approximately 270 more daily trips when
compared to the former Eliot School at full capacity. Specific impacts of the proposed
development trip generation are discussed later in this document.
Table 6
Trip Generation Comparison
Land Use Type Size
A.M. Peak
Hour Trips
P.M. Peak
Hour Trips Daily
TripsIn Out In Out
Eliot School 528 Students 131 107 39 40 681
Eliot Park Development 138 DU 15 58 58 31 947
Difference -116 -49 +19 -9 +266
YEAR 2014 BUILD CONDITION
To determine if the existing roadway network and proposed access scenarios can accommodate
the year 2014 build traffic forecasts, a detailed traffic operations analysis was conducted. The
study intersections were once again analyzed using a combination of Synchro/SimTraffic and the
HCM. It should be noted the improvements recommended to mitigate the existing capacity issues
(i.e. signal timing and left-turn phasing improvements) were assumed to be implemented in the
year 2014 build conditions to better identify impacts of the proposed development.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 35
y Li Louisiana AveKentucky AveJersey AveIdaho AveHampshire AveFranklin Ave
Nevada AveCedar Lake Rd
W 23rd St
W 26th St Edgewood AveEliot View Rd
0127879
September 2012
Eliot Park Traffic Study Figure 4Directional Distribution
City of St. Louis Park
20%
25%30%25%NORTHNorthH:\Projects\7879\TS\Figures\Fig04_Directional Distribution.cdrNORTHNorthStudy SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 36
(0) 0(21) 5 0 (0)0 (0) (8) 2
0 (0)
8 (4)
21 (11) (20) 6(0) 0 2 (9)0 (0) (4) 9
(12) 20
0127879
February 2013
Eliot Park Traffic Study Figure 5Site Generated Trips
City of St. Louis ParkNORTHNorthH:\Projects\7879\TS\Figures\Fig02_Site Generated Trips-New.cdrNORTHNorthStudy SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 37
y Li Louisiana AveKentucky AveJersey AveIdaho AveHampshire AveFranklin Ave
Nevada AveCedar Lake Rd
W 23rd St
W 26th St Edgewood AveEliot View Rd
220
(295
)385
(595
)75
(195
)Louis
iana
Ave
(75
)
50
(630
)
320
(80
)
40
Cedar
L
a
k
e
R
d
(110)
1
2
0
(315)
3
8
0
(165)
1
4
0
25 (
5
0)
150 (
4
7
5)
120 (
3
8
0)
Idaho
Ave
Cedar
L
a
k
e
R
d
(25)
1
0
(685)
6
7
0
5 (
1
5)
245 (
8
9
0)
(15
)
15
(10
)
20
Hampshi
re
Ave
Cedar
L
a
k
e
R
d
(30)
1
0
(665)
6
7
5
(10)
5
5 (
2
0)
215 (
8
8
0)
5 (
2
5)15
(15
)0
(5
)10
(10
)
(10
)
15
(0
)
0
(20
)
30
19,100
12,200
13,800
14,150
13,700700
825
0127879
February 2013
Eliot Park Traffic Study Figure 6Year 2014 Build Conditions
City of St. Louis ParkNORTHNorthH:\Projects\7879\TS\Figures\Fig06_2014 Build Conditions-New.cdrNORTHNorthStudy SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 38
Results of the year 2014 build operations analysis shown in Table 7 indicates that all study
intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable overall LOS D or better during the a.m. and
p.m. peak hours with the proposed development. Side-street delays are expected to be similar or
less than existing conditions for vehicles waiting on Idaho Avenue and Hampshire Avenue to
enter Cedar Lake Road. These side-street delays are considered acceptable and do not require
mitigation.
Table 7
2014 Build Peak Hour Capacity Analysis
Intersection A.M. Peak P.M. Peak
LOS Delay LOS Delay
Cedar Lake Road/Louisiana Avenue C 25 sec. D 50 sec.
Cedar Lake Road/Idaho Avenue *A/B 11 sec. A/D 30 sec.
Cedar Lake Road/Hampshire Avenue *A/B 14 sec. A/F 55 sec.
* Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control, where the overall LOS is shown followed
by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay.
To minimize the impact of left-turning vehicles along Cedar Lake Road, restriping this segment
of Cedar Lake Road to a three-lane roadway section should be considered. This segment of
roadway appears to be a good candidate for this type of roadway section due to the number of
residential driveways on Cedar Lake Road, the lack of on-street parking demand, the existing
roadway width, and the average daily traffic volume along the corridor. Further discussions with
City staff and impacted residents should be considered to determine the feasibility and
perception of this recommendation, including potential impacts to the existing bike route along
Cedar Lake Road.
Finally, if the recommended improvements to address the existing operational and queuing
issues are not implemented by the time that the proposed development is constructed, it is
important to determine how the study intersections will be impacted. As noted earlier, westbound
queues along Cedar Lake Road currently extend beyond Idaho Avenue and Hampshire Avenue
approximately five percent of the p.m. peak hour. Under future year 2014 conditions without the
existing recommended improvements, these queues are expected to continue and extend beyond
Idaho Avenue and Hampshire Avenue more frequently (approximately 15 to 20 percent of the
p.m. peak hour). Although side-street delays at the study intersections are not expected to be
significantly impacted based on these queues, it does create a potential safety issues as vehicles
queued along Cedar Lake Road allow access for vehicles from the side-streets. This situation
should be monitored to determine if potential improvements are necessary.
Study SessionMeeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 2)
Title: Hunt Associates’ TIF Application for Redevelopment of Former Eliot School Property Page 39
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Discussion Item: 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: City Hall Renovation Update Project No. 2009-1600
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action is necessary at this time. The purpose of the
discussion is to update the Council on the project plans, budget and schedule.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council have questions or further direction about
the City Hall renovation project before plans and specification are finalized for public bid?
SUMMARY: Complete plans and specifications are nearly finalized. The design has met all
the goals for creating a functional and inviting City Hall entrance, including service delivery and
office space. Krech, O’Brien, Mueller, and Associates (KOMA) will be present at the meeting to
provide an overview of the final design before proceeding with the project.
The design phase has taken a few weeks longer than the initial project schedule had anticipated.
If the project is ready for bid-letting during March, the targeted project construction between
June and October should still be achieved.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
A total project cost of $2.29 million is currently planned based on the construction cost estimates
provided by KOMA and furnishing estimates by Hendrickson office products. This amount is
higher than previous estimates. This sum includes design fees from the concept study through
construction plus a 10% construction contingency. City Controller Brian Swanson has
confirmed that the estimated total project cost can be paid from the Capital Replacement Fund
(CRF) without negatively affecting the long range financial plan. Please note that $2.43 million
is specified in the CRF for City Hall construction projects in 2013. Further discussion on project
costs and budget implications is included later in this report.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: City Hall Renovation Update Project No. 2009-1600
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
Design criteria for creating a remodeled public entrance and first floor of City Hall began during
2011 before the Fire Department administration staff moved into Fire Station #1. The need for
an improved service experience has been evident for many years since the relocation of the main
entrance to the first floor in 2000 following elimination of parking on Minnetonka Blvd.
The design firm of Krech, O’Brien, Mueller, and Associates (KOMA) was retained to develop
conceptual design possibilities. A presentation to Council on July 23, 2012 resulted in
proceeding with development of construction drawings and specifications.
Early financial planning for the various improvements to City Hall resulted in allocating $2.43
million in the Capital Replacement Fund (CRF) for 2013 to accomplish all of the interior and
exterior renovations now included within this project. Based on initial concept estimates by
KOMA before a design was finalized, a project budget of $1.7-1.8 million appeared possible as
related to Council in the July 23rd 2012 report.
Council discussion during the November 5, 2012 meeting provided direction to include public art
as an integral part of the building design. A range of 1% - 2% of the project cost was discussed
as reasonable depending on the type and scale of art. An entrance canopy offering a covered
casual meeting and waiting space was also preferred. This two items have contributed to
increases in the project budget.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS:
Design finalized – Complete plans and specifications are nearly finalized. Meetings with staff
and detailed analysis of existing building systems during the process have resulted in a design
successfully achieving the project goals, including:
• Receptionist/welcoming counter capable to provide increased services to customers.
• Improved security with delineation between public and staff areas.
• Inviting and flexible community room.
• Open, more quiet, and safer interior stairway.
• Consolidated IR office area.
• Employee break room and showers to facilitate health and wellness initiative.
• Main entrance canopy with signage and covered seating area.
Conversations with the City Manger during the design process included ensuring the Community
Room could be utilized for City Council Study Sessions in addition to varied training and
meeting formats. Developing this potential resulted in some increased costs for the technology
to accommodate current and expected uses such as video conferencing. The A/V equipment cost
is identified as a bid alternate to allow flexibility when purchased and may be charged as a
technology improvement/replacement item for which separate CRF funding is available in 2013.
Other alternatives which would add value if funding allows include an electric vehicle charging
station for public use and conversion of the two-car garage to a dedicated delivery
entrance/storage area. These options are identified in the budget section below.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Title: City Hall Renovation Update Project No. 2009-1600
Public Art – A staff committee is working with Jack Becker, Forecast Public Art, to have an
artist design and install five art glass thermo-pane windows in the new community room. They
will be visible when approaching the City Hall entrance and also from within the community
room. Low level LED lighting will illuminate the panels during the evening.
An RFQ has been distributed to about a dozen artists with a $30,000 maximum budget (about
1.5% of the overall construction cost) for the finished art glass project. The committee will be
reviewing submittals on March 1st and selecting a small group of finalists to further develop their
vision.
Themes and Objectives provided to the artists:
1. The new Community Room will serve as a gathering space. Artists are encouraged to
create a design that builds upon this function and provides further opportunities for
community engagement. The artwork should be welcoming and accessible.
2. Artists should consider the existing architecture and color scheme (interior and
exterior) and surrounding environment, taking into account the furnishings of the
space and the exterior views out the windows.
3. St. Louis Park prides itself on innovation and originality. The artworks should attempt
to embody this sense of pride.
4. The design should be highly original, and help establish the Community Room as a
unique destination.
The committee will also be working with Jack Becker to select benches and bicycle racks for
under the front entrance canopy once the art glass design is selected, complementing the theme.
These will be catalog items purchased and installed by the City at the completion of the project.
IR Office – The design includes an open rectangular area which will incorporate an all modular
office workspaces for all IR staff. Eliminating hard walled offices allows for faster construction
by the general contractor and maintains future layout flexibility when the workspace needs may
change. Supervisor offices will utilize DIRTT panels extending to the ceiling with significant
glass area provided to maintain light sharing. Other workspaces will be created with 66” tall
fabric covered partitions, allowing for economical placement of overhead lighting, fire
sprinklers, and ventilation systems.
All IR staff will be relocated during construction to other workspaces temporarily created in City
Hall, Police Station, MSC, and Fire Station #1. The building capacity gained in recent
construction projects allows this remodeling to occur easier and more cost efficient than if
contractor needed to stage the project around first floor staff.
Budget – KOMA Utilized PCL construction to provide cost estimating based on the most recent
plans being presented to Council. Hendrickson PSG, a State contract provider of many office
products and the DIRTT wall system, has provided the office workspace and first floor
furnishings estimate.
The project costs grew once the extent of plumbing, mechanical, and electrical modifications
were identified. Providing a larger curved entrance canopy facing Raleigh Avenue, with covered
seating and City Hall signage, added both functionality and cost to the project. Community
Room technology and public art are the remaining design decisions that increased project cost
during the design phase.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 3) Page 4
Title: City Hall Renovation Update Project No. 2009-1600
Continual monitoring of costs during the process resulted in some value engineering to reduce
estimated construction costs. Some examples include reducing material quality in non-public
spaces and modifying the office area workstation areas. Additionally, three items which are
easily separated are being proposed as bid alternates.
Estimated project costs are as follows:
General contractor base $1,574,934
Bid alternate #1 (A/V equipment) $60,411
Bid alternate #2 (electric car charger) $15,500
Bid Alternate #3 (delivery room) $21,513
Workspaces and furnishings $185,000
Construction Contingency (10%) $160,000
Permits $20,000
Public Art $30,000
Benches/rack/landscaping (by city) $20,000
Sidewalk to temporary 2nd floor entrance $9,500
Soils Testing $3,000
Initial concept design (KOMA) $30,000
Full design plans and specifications (KOMA) $160,000
Total project budget with alternates accepted = $2,289,858
The $2.29 million is higher than estimated during the conceptual stage; however it is within the
$2.43 million allocated/budgeted in the 2013 CRF. Additional technology
improvement/replacement funds planned for 2013 are available if needed, and include the
community room video conferencing system included in the project.
NEXT STEPS:
If Council provides direction to continue with the project, staff will return in March to
recommend the Council adopt a resolution establishing and ordering City Hall 1st Floor
Renovation Project No. 2009-1600, approving plans and specifications, and authorizing
advertisement for bids.
Estimated construction time is about four months. The current schedule is anticipated to have a
contractor selected by June and construction occurring from July to October.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Discussion Item: 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The purpose of this discussion is to update the Council on
recent activities related to the Clear Channel Billboard relocations, project schedule and costs
related to this project – Project No. 2012-0100.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Staff seeks Council input regarding:
1. Are the proposed sites for the Clear Channel Billboard relocations acceptable to
Council?
2. Does Council have any questions over the remaining activities identified in the
Project Schedule?
3. Other?
SUMMARY: Construction plans and specifications are undergoing final review and awaiting
authorization by MnDOT and FHWA. The project schedule has slipped about 3-4 weeks
resulting in a new bid letting date proposed for mid-April, contract award date in early May and
construction start in mid-May. Remaining actions for Council to approve prior to bid letting
include: approve a utility relocation agreement with Xcel Energy, approve cooperative
agreements with MnDOT and Met Council, and approve a consultant agreement with SEH, Inc.
for services related to administering the Remedial Action Plan (RAP) and engineering support
for plan interpretation and advice during construction.
Right of way acquisition activities are on-going with the seven affected parcels. A settlement
was reached with one parcel owner for acquisition of a temporary easement. The remaining six
parcels are in eminent domain proceedings but negotiations continue and settlements are
anticipated with most of the parcel owners. Clear Channel Outdoor Advertising, the owner of 2
affected parcels, has submitted their preferred sites for the two proposed billboard relocations,
(see attachments). Staff and the City Attorney will discuss details of the proposed billboard
relocations at the February 25, 2013 Study Session meeting.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: See Discussion for latest Project Costs –
note that estimated project costs have gone up.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Billboard Relocation Graphics
Draft Communications Plan for Business Area
Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director
Scott Brink, City Engineer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
History
The City’s Capital Improvement Program (C.I.P.) identifies the Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue
intersection as a priority improvement project. The proposed project, which provides for the
construction of a grade-separated interchange at Louisiana Avenue and Highway 7, also includes
pedestrian and bicycle friendly improvements along with re-configuration of the frontage roads
in order to improve access, safety, and traffic flow for both the Highway 7 corridor and
Louisiana Avenue. This proposed improvement is essential in meeting long term transportation
and safety needs of both MnDOT and the City as well as quality of life and redevelopment needs
in this area of the city.
Phase 4 Activities (underway)
Phase 4 activities, described as Final Design and Plan Preparation, include detailed engineering
work needed to complete plans and specifications to obtain final MnDOT project approvals and
authorization for bidding. Final plan review is underway at MnDOT. The plans need to undergo
review by a number of functional groups and offices at MnDOT before the project can be
authorized. Once the project is authorized, the City is allowed to begin advertising for bids.
Based on the MnDOT review timeline our project schedule has slipped about 4 weeks (see
updated schedule below).
In addition to the plan review, MnDOT is drafting a Cooperative Agreement for their
construction cost participation, contract administration services, and final ownership and
maintenance responsibilities after the construction is complete. Similarly, Metropolitan
Council’s Environmental Services (MCES) division is drafting a Cooperative Agreement
providing for the replacement of their regional sewer interceptor line with our interchange
project.
Billboard Relocation
The City met again with Clear Channel representatives to further discuss possible areas for
relocating the billboards on their remnant parcels. Clear Channel has proposed new sites for the
two billboards which provide the desired visibility to traffic on Highway 7 while maintaining or
possibly slightly reducing the height of the current signs (see attachments). The billboard
located in the southwest quadrant of the Highway 7 and Louisiana intersection is proposed to be
relocated to the far northwest corner of that remnant parcel. This location is advantageous for a
few reasons. It will be located adjacent to the low point of the roadway elevation on Highway 7
west of the new bridge. This will give it the best visibility to traffic on Hwy 7 without having to
raise the sign height. It also opens up the space in the remnant parcel for possible future
redevelopment of the land should it be sold in the future. The billboard in the northeast quadrant
will be located in the far southwest corner of the remnant parcel. This location also provides the
best visibility to traffic on Hwy 7 without having to raise the sign height.
The current estimated land acquisition and bill board relocation costs are as follows:
Southwest Billboard
Land Value (Appraised Value) $248,000
Billboard Relocation (Clear Channel estimate) $125,000
Lost Rent (Clear Channel estimate) $43,000
Total $416,000
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 4) Page 3
Title: Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
Northeast Billboard
Land Value (Appraised Value) $338,000
Billboard Relocation (Clear Channel estimate) $125,000
Lost Rent $0
Total $463,000
The estimated billboard relocation costs by Clear Channel are for a new modern technology
billboard. The City disputes Clear Channel’s claim to pay full price for a new billboard which
will replace a 30 year old model. The City appraisers are determining a fair valuation for the
billboard relocation. In addition, the appraised land values above account for the billboards
remaining on the remnant parcel. Should the billboards be removed, the appraisal of the land
would increase the land value by a total of about $250,000. Removal of the billboards would
also result in a loss of business claim which the City Attorney estimates could potentially be as
high as $1.2 million or more.
Business Area Outreach
Staff continues to hold monthly meetings with area business to discuss communications and
marketing plans/strategies. At a recently held meeting on February 19th, staff presented a draft
Communication Plan (see attachment) and discussed special signage needs along detour routes
for the businesses.
Remaining Council Actions
Over the next two months, Council action will be required on the following items:
• Approve a utility relocation agreement for undergrounding power lines with Xcel Energy,
current cost estimated at $872,000.
• Approve consultant agreement for additional service related to the administration of the
Remedial Action Plan (RAP) needed for the handling and disposal of any contaminated
soils encountered during the course of construction and additional services for support
during construction for plan interpretation or modification.
• Approve Cooperative Agreements with Mn/DOT and MCES.
Project Schedule
A detailed schedule of activities through the start of construction is presented below:
Activity Target Date
MnDOT final plan review Underway
Council approval of Xcel Energy utility relocation agreement March 4, 2013
MnDOT Authorizes Project Friday, March 8, 2013
Advertisement for Bids March 21, 2013 – April 11, 2013
MnDOT Cooperative Agreement executed by the City April 1, 2012
MCES Cooperative Agreement executed by the City April 1, 2012
Bid opening (letting) Thursday, April 18, 2013
DBE clearance through MnDOT EEO office April 18 – April 30, 2013
Award of Contract May 6, 2013
Start of Construction May 20, 2013
Substantial Project Completion Fall 2014
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 4) Page 4
Title: Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
Project Costs
Presented below are the latest estimated project costs based on final design work. All of the
funding sources are also presented below:
Current Estimated Project Costs
Construction $20,400,000
Public Art $ 450,000
Preliminary and Final Design Engineering $ 2,201,500
Construction Engineering (by MnDOT) $ 1,800,000
Remedial Action Plan Administration $ 450,000
Construction Engineering Support (SEH) $ 200,000
Undergrounding Power Lines $ 872,000
MCES Forcemain Work $ 2,150,000
Right of Way Acquisition Services (appraisals, title work, attorney fees) $ 100,000
Right of Way (Purchasing land and easements, condemnation costs) $ 2,600,000
Total Costs $31,223,500
Funding Sources
Federal (STP) Funds $7,630,000
MnDOT Access Management Funds $1,000,000
MnDOT Municipal Cooperative Agreement Funds $ 594,000
MnDOT (Construction Eng’r - in lieu of funds) $1,800,000
TED Grant (MnDOT & DEED Program) $3,000,000
MCES Funds for Forcemain Work $2,150,000
City Funds (20% construction grant match – source HRA Levy) $2,398,000
City Funds (Preliminary and Final Design Eng’r – source HRA Levy) $2,201,500
City Funds (Right of Way – source HRA Levy) $2,700,000
City - Water and Sewer Utility Funds $ 200,000
City Funds (Misc Const., Public Art, RAP, Eng’r Support - source HRA Levy) $6,678,000
Total Committed Funds $31,223,500
Total City Share $15,049,500
**Note that the City’s estimated share of the project cost is approximately $2.75 million
higher than what was most recently reported to the City Council. At the study session staff
will provide details on why this amount has gone up and possible opportunities for our
share of the project cost to go down. Also note that the bulk of the City’s share of this
project is being paid from the HRA levy funds that have accumulated over time and the
revenues from the existing HRA levy into the future.
980+00
985+00
990+00
10+00
20+00
10+00
20+00
14+00980+00
985+00
990+00
20+0025+0020+0025+0010+0010+0015+0015+00
19+00
11+00
15+00
11+00
15+00 11+0015+002/12/201310:58:07 AMS:\PT\S\Stlou\116227\5-dsgn\51-cadd\General\116227_BILLBOARD FIGS.dgnFEB2013 NEW PLANCITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MN.
T.H. 7 / LOUISIANA AVE.
S.P. NO. 2706-226 S.P. NO. 163-010-038
EB TH 7
SCALE 100’LOUI
S
I
ANA AVE.
W. LAKE ST.
WALKER ST.
WB TH 7
WB TH 7
EB TH 7
B
A
EXISTING BILLBOARD A
FUTURE MNDOT R/W
FUTURE MNDOT R/W
PLAN VIEW
BILLBOARD RELOCATION
EXISTING BILLBOARD B
BILLBOARD LOCATION
APPROXIMATE NEW
BILLBOARD LOCATION
APPROXIMATE NEW
2/12/2013
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 4)
Title: Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Ave Interchange Project Page 5
2/12/201310:57:46 AMS:\PT\S\Stlou\116227\5-dsgn\51-cadd\General\116227_BILLBOARD FIGS.dgnXSEC PROFILECITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MN.
T.H. 7 / LOUISIANA AVE.
S.P. NO. 2706-226 S.P. NO. 163-010-03817.37’17.40’890
900
910
920
890
900
910
920
930
940
930
940
TH7 (LOOKING EAST)
TH7 (LOOKING WEST)
BILLBOARD A
BILLBOARD B
TH 7
PROFILE GRADE
{ TH 7
EXISTING GROUND LINE
TH 7
CROSS SECTIONS AND PROFILE
BILLBOARD RELOCATION
BILLBOARD A
BILLBOARD B
GRADE
FINISHED
GROUND LINE
EXISTING
GRADE
FINISHED
EXISTING GROUND LINE
INP R/W
T/E
INP R/W
R/W
MNDOT
FUTURE
R/W
MNDOT
FUTURE
CL BYPASS
CL EB TH 7 S.W. RAMPCL
WB TH 7CL
N.E. RAMPCL
2/12/2013
980+00 985+00 990+00897.59897.52897.50897.48897.48897.48897.41897.34897.35897.30897.33897.35897.18897.19897.14897.48897.79898.04898.27898.64898.79898.86899.13899.40899.57899.74899.87900.15900.46900.65900.90901.31898.480898.482898.664899.027899.572900.297901.204902.291903.557904.882906.207907.532908.857910.182911.436912.472913.286913.879914.249914.398914.324914.029913.511912.772911.811910.632909.382908.140907.015906.040905.215904.540904.015Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 4)
Title: Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Ave Interchange Project Page 6
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 4)
Title: Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Ave Interchange Project Page 7
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 4)
Title: Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Ave Interchange Project Page 8
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Discussion Item: 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: City Council Workshop Follow-Up
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action at this time. This report is intended to
summarize the discussions which took place at the recent City Council Workshop and stimulate
conversation regarding future actions and priorities for the City.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: No formal policy consideration at this time. However, the
conversation at the Study Session will likely result in policy related matters in the future.
SUMMARY: On February 1st and 2nd the City Council held its annual workshop. Friday
evening was spent discussing the Carver Governance Model, reviewing the Enneagram styles of
each of the Councilmembers, undertaking a review and discussion of the Councils “Unwritten
Rules” and a general dialogue about the working relationship of the Council. Attached is a
summary of the outcome of the discussion on the Council’s “Unwritten Rules”.
Saturday’s discussion was facilitated by Craig Rapp and focused on a variety of topics including
a discussion on the City’s Culture and Value Proposition, SWOT Analysis and setting priorities
and outcome indicators for the future related to the City’s four Strategic Directions. Attached is
a summary prepared by Craig Rapp of Saturday’s discussion.
After the retreat I tried to take all of the information discussed and presented Saturday afternoon
and fit them in to the City’s four Strategic Directions in the form of specific 2 Year Key Outcome
Indicators (KOI’s) and 2 Year Strategic Initiatives (SI’s). Attached is a simple matrix for each of
the City’s four Strategic Directions that identifies these outcome indicators and strategic
initiatives. Obviously these are still a rough draft but hopefully will be useful in stimulating
conversation at the Study Session. I had intended/directed and hoped that this would have taken
place at the Workshop but unfortunately Craig did not take us there – and, we simply ran out of
time.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: All four of the City’s Strategic Directions are impacted by this
topic/discussion
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Unwritten Rules
Strategic Planning Summary (prepared by Craig Rapp)
KOI’s/SI’s for each Strategic Direction
Strategic Planning Flow Chart
Prepared by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5) Page 2
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up
City Council Unwritten Rules
January 2012
• If we want something pulled off of the consent agenda, we let Tom know ahead of time.
• Tell Tom if you can’t make a meeting.
• Copy Tom on dealings with directors.
• Go to Tom for “top/big bowl” questions.
• Mayor doesn’t make motions.
• There should be no side conversations.
• WE “go out” after meetings
• If at-large council members or the Mayor gets called about a city issue, make sure the
ward council person also knows about the call.
• If at-large council members go to a ward meeting, they let the ward council member
know.
• If all of council receives an email, typically it will be the ward council member that will
handle the reply (unless it is forwarded to the City Manager to respond).
• If at all possible, if council gets email, they will try to work through Tom so the
citizen/customer doesn’t have to go back and forth.
• At large council members fill in for ward council members at meetings at their request.
• National Night out does not apply to telling. We all go. The same is true with public
gatherings and elections.
• If there is a motion to be made about something specific to a ward, the ward council
person shares their perspective and typically they make the motion.
• Praise in public, criticize in private.
• No backstabbing.
• If anyone of us on the council has issues with another person, talk directly to that person.
• We tend to use seniority for things like EDA, Pro-Tem appointments etc.
• Pay attention to media reporters—defer calls to Jamie if possible
• When council makes an agreement about behavior or presenting/speaking at other
meetings, the Mayor will go around the circle and have each person say exactly what that
means to them to ensure council is in agreement. The Mayor will assume that if council
agrees that they are not going to speak/present at another meeting, this means that the
councilmember will not speak/present as a council member or a citizen/resident. If a
councilmember intends to go to a meeting/event and speak, they will inform others prior
to the event/meeting or activity.
City of St. Louis Park
Strategic Planning Summary February 2013
Prepared by:
Craig Rapp, LLC
“Connecting the Purpose and the Possibilities”
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 3
Date: February 21, 2013
To: Tom Harmening, City Manager
From: Craig Rapp
Subject: Strategic Planning Summary The following is a summary of the daylong strategic planning session conducted February 2, 2013. The session was held at the AAA offices with the City Council, City Manager and Department Heads in attendance. The morning session included a brief overview of the strategic planning process and an extended discussion of organizational culture and value proposition-described below: I. Organizational Culture and Value Proposition The facilitator stated that an organization’s culture, and its value proposition provide the foundation for the way in which services are delivered and strategic direction is set. Two framing questions were posed:
o What is our City?
o What do we want it to be?
• As a place to live
• As an organization charged with the responsibility to serve citizens, guide development and regulate certain activities Broad descriptions, and “rules of thumb” regarding Core Culture and Value Proposition were provided: Core Culture- “The way things really get done”
o Culture has to do with what you spend your time doing, how you get rewarded, make decisions, talk to each other, treat citizens, and deal with stakeholders.
o Organizations often aren’t consciously aware of their culture, and they take their culture for granted Value Proposition
o The primary benefit of a service/product. Describes how an organization will differentiate itself, and what particular set of values it will deliver.
o Organizations typically choose one of three approaches as a primary value proposition: Operational Excellence, Product/Service Leadership, or Customer Intimacy.
• Rule #1: Provide the best offering(s) by excelling in a specific dimension of value.
• Rule #2: Maintain threshold standards on the other dimension of values.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 4
The group was then introduced to the strengths and weaknesses of the four core cultures and three value propositions summarized below: Four Core Cultures
Control Culture (Military - command and control)
q Systematic, clear, conservative
q Inflexible, compliance more important than innovation
Competence Culture (Research Lab – best and brightest)
q Results oriented, efficient, systematic
q Values can be ignored, human element missing, over planning
Collaboration Culture (Family-teams)
q Manages diversity well, versatile, talented
q Decisions take longer, group think, short-term oriented
Cultivation Culture (Non-profit/religious group-mission/values)
q Creative, socially responsible, consensus oriented
q Lacks focus, judgmental, lack of control Three Value Propositions
Operational Excellence (Wal-Mart, Southwest Airlines)
q They adjust to us (command and control)
Product/Service Leadership (Apple, Google)
q They ‘ooh and ‘ah’ over our products/services (competence)
Customer Intimacy (Nordstrom, Ritz-Carlton)
q We get to know them and solve their problems/satisfy their needs (collaborative) The Council and staff engaged in a lively discussion regarding the organization’s value proposition- noting that the current approach was probably operational excellence but that there are high expectations in the community for customer intimacy. The group questioned some of the underlying assumptions about expectations and what the city’s responsiveness should be. A long discussion regarding the primary and secondary focus for the future as they attempted to define a primary value proposition. The group came to a general consensus that the organization provides a high level of customer service, suggesting a customer intimacy as the highest priority, however it was repeatedly pointed out that innovation and calculated risk taking have historically been fundamental to how business is conducted. It was also pointed out that the city, while operationally excellent, has been willing to pay for quality and a high level of service provision. Overall, the group agreed to continue this discussion- and in particular, how it will guide the city’s strategic plan.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 5
II. Strategic Planning The afternoon session focused on establishing strategic direction and priorities. At the meeting, a process was used to produce a set of strategic priorities and key performance indicators for each priority. Prior to the meeting, the City Council, City Manager and staff were asked to complete a questionnaire that asked each respondent to comment on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (S.W.O.T.) facing the community and organization. In addition, they were also asked to identify the highest priority issues. The group process included three rounds of review and brainstorming: In the first round, the group identified the most frequently mentioned attributes in each category; In the second round, the groups compared strengths with opportunities and weaknesses with threats, to determine which opportunities would maximize strengths, and which weaknesses would be exacerbated by the threats- from this round, each group identified strategic priorities for further consideration. The full group then engaged in a discussion centered on determining which priorities were most important- based upon both the SWOT analysis and their own sense of community needs. What emerged is a set of four strategic priorities. The priorities and their attributes-which will be used to create definitions- are described on the following page:
Strategic Priorities
1. Redevelopment - Diverse revenue sources - Smart spending - Strong reserves - Bond rating
2. Infrastructure - Maintaining quality - Planning for change/needs
3. SWLRT - Achieving alignment with city policy - Maximizing opportunities
4. Operational Effectiveness - Establishing service levels in line with council, community understanding and expectation
The next step in the process was the development of 2-3 key performance indicators (KPI’s) for each strategic priority. Key performance indicators are measures of performance,
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 6
related to a strategic priority. They are expressed as outcomes with targets- defining a desired state. The Council-Staff group worked together and developed a set of KPI’s for each priority. As the group created the outcome statements, they were encouraged to link the outcomes to the four overarching “Strategic Directions” adopted by the Council. The draft KPI’s for each strategic priority are:
Key Performance Indicators
1. Redevelopment a) Completion of LRT Station Area Plans in Rezoning of properties in station area by 1/1/14 b) 2-6 Housing development projects; 600 D.U.’s; 20% affordable c) Identify opportunities for 10-15 new single family lots d) 300,000 sq. ft. of new commercial/industrial. development by 12/31/15 e) 15% of new com/industrial redevelopment to be “green businesses”
2. Infrastructure a) Sidewalks and trails - By 2023 the adaption and implementation will be complete - Continue to monitor and maintain sidewalks & trails - Adopt a development plan including financial viability and CIP by 12/31/13 do this every year b) New Civic Center - Financial ability and timeline decided by 8/13 - By the end of public process is completed by 12/13 - By the end of 12/13 the decision is made to go forward or not c) Fiber Optics - By the end of 2013 complete ordinance for all new construction - Goals for expansion of current fiber optics network by 6/14 - Help market current & future development around fiber optics network
3. SWLRT a) Resolve freight rail issue in a manner consistent with the adopted City resolution/policy b) Plan for quality redevelopment and infrastructure improvements associated with LRT stations c) Insure community cohesion and connections are planned for the LRT stations, especially if freight rail is rerouted thru SLP d) Develop community engagement plan for the municipal consent process
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 7
4. Operational Effectiveness a) Establishing SL in line with council, community, understanding and expectation b) Level of responsiveness to citizens: non-emergency calls or emails, that require a response, must be returned within 1 business day. c) Service levels should be fair and equitable. III. Next Steps A number of steps need to be taken to finalize the group’s efforts: (1) Finalize the KOI’s- ensure that outcomes are expressed correctly, reflect Council expectations/ priorities and are linked to Strategic Directions. (2) Establish a set of strategic initiatives for each Priority/KOI. The initiatives should be aligned with the priorities, and targeted to the outcomes expressed in the key performance indicators. (3) Create action plans for each initiative- developed by departments responsible for implementing The staff will begin this task in the near future and report back to the City Council for consideration and adoption of the strategic initiatives and multi-year work plan. The strategic framework established at the worksession will set the City’s direction for the next two years. While adjustments will certainly be made to accommodate changing conditions, it provides a strong foundation and focus for success. A summary of the group’s SWOT process- including the full set of responses and the prioritized rankings that took place at the retreat, are contained in the following Appendices.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 8
Appendix I SWOT Results - Strengths
Council
• Our staff. They do the little things well – because in the final analysis they’re not little – they’re very big. They provide services effectively and efficiently and competently.
• Good reputation among residents as a progressive, well-managed city
• Resident willingness to pay sufficient, increasing taxes to fund the services they want
• Experienced staff
• Long tenured Department Heads and staff
• Forward thinking Planning – Anticipate, Innovate
• Technology evolving internally
• Senior leadership is well seasoned and knows it’s job. They are efficient.
• We have residents that trust us (I think).
• Physical location in the twin cities
• Racial/demographic diversity
• Balance of residential and commercial property.
• The services being provided
• The housing stock
• The location
• The city staff
• The community (our strong neighborhoods)
Staff
• We have the financial resources to do many projects, initiatives, capital expenditures and business processes.
• Council supports staff with allocation of resources (people, equipment, funding) to get work done.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 9
• Highly motivated, educated and knowledgeable staff. We are able to attract potential employees with ease due to our location of our community, resources and high level of work opportunities.
• Having OD program.
• Resources in place (financial strength, staff skills) for action
• Pro-active political and manager leadership committed to addressing key issues and building a vital community.
• An engaged, generally supportive community.
• Communications systems
• Acceptance of diversity & change
• Pride of staff in work
• Staffed well relative to most basic work; allows focus on some advanced tasks / Council projects
• Significant emphasis placed on organizational development sessions, training sessions
• Leadership strong at the top – anticipate, innovate, adapt
• Newer workers
• Ambition (pace of work, competitiveness)
• Commitment to be a learning organization and all that has come from that
• Committed and high quality employees
• Sound financial condition
• Creativity
• Internal and external communication systems are very good
• Commitment to strong neighborhoods
• Expertise in redevelopment
• Great housing programs
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 10
• Commitment to replacing aging infrastructure
• A Council that is supportive of staff
• Great public safety operations
• Community generally supportive and trusting of government organization.
• Efforts of organization to engage community members through information, involvement, and support of formal neighborhoods.
• Strong financial condition allows pursuit of opportunities.
• High level of customer services.
• We have great people and strong relationships built upon trust with the community.
• Our culture is one of service and responsiveness to the community.
• City has a vision, mission, and values
• Desire and willingness of management to properly fund infrastructure maintenance and replacement
• Recent technology improvements - NexGen, SCADA, GIS
• Infrastructure overall is in fairly good condition
• Good organizational reputation and relationship with residents / businesses
• Progressive and fair City Council
• Established ability to provide for public involvement
• Very skilled and dedicated employees
• Employee desire to do good, cost effective work
• Moderately priced taxes / user fees (cost competitive environment)
• Its greatest strength is its personnel. The City has great people who want to do the right thing.
• Another strength is that the City has always been forward thinking and been able to look to the future and not wait for the past to catch up with it.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 11
• A third strength is that because of its forward thinking the City is financially sound which allows it to maintain a high standard.
• Strong commitment to neighborhoods.
• Excellent park system.
• The City of St. Louis Park has a well-maintained infrastructure of streets, trails, parks etc.
• We have an aggressive CIP in all areas of the City so that we do not fall behind.
• The residents of St. Louis Park have a level of trust for City council and staff.
• We provide a high level of service and very good customer service.
• Our Police and Fire Departments are very respected by the residents. There is a great deal of trust in them as emergency providers. Our community policing is working and is a model to many cities.
• Our council and staff are also progressive in looking at what is missing the in the community.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 12
Appendix II SWOT Results - Weaknesses
Council
• Tendency to assume that the needs and views of families with children, and the School District, should get greater weight and resources than the needs and views of the other (majority) residents
• Treating private economic development proposals with great deference, rather than proactively insisting on proposals that fit with our Vision and seeking proposals accordingly
• Lots of talk but repeated delay in actually addressing “big picture”, expensive needs: ex: construction of additional north-south roadways
• At times the council is dysfunctional and has weak leadership. We should be providing clear direction to the staff based on the Carver governance model rather than the “we’ll listen to whoever whines the loudest” model. We fail in that regard on a somewhat regular and frightening basis now. We allow tiny parochial minorities to govern our policy and look only to the next meeting for our vision rather than to the next generation.
o The fundamental dichotomy here is whether we view ourselves as advocates for a constituency or an arbiter of competing opinions. We can’t figure that out and while we pay homage to the Carver model we frankly allow our identity crisis to ooze its way into our decisional process.
o The worst fear is that we cannot fix this because our residents don’t want us to. They don’t want us to listen to all of them they want us to listen to only them – to the exclusion of all other opinions to the contrary and they’ll do almost anything to make sure we don’t. They’ll misstate, misrepresent and excoriate anyone who adheres to the carver model and insists on listening to every opinion before making a decision. We have done a perfectly lousy job of instilling that basic understanding of the process in people.
o The question for us is whether we now abandon the model to which we have prayed all these years but have never truly implemented or practiced and go back to the politics as usual model or whether we have the will to adhere to our stated principle and enforce it not only among ourselves but on our residents as well. Leadership is defined not by how well we stand up to our adversaries but rather by how well we stand up to our friends.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 13
• Our senior leadership has been around a while so it’s not clear to me if there is an established succession plan and leadership cultivation path for those in the wings.
• Established ways of thinking – familiarity is comforting to us so we don’t like to change things up.
• Retirement of several strong leaders in the organization
• Potential for complacency
• Rising expectations of residents
• Non diversity of staff
• We are risk/conflict averse. Need to not be afraid to try new things and fail.
• Norms of the council breeds inefficiency, duplication and confusion.
• Partnership with the School District could be stronger
• Continued higher and higher property taxes
• Our inspections departments’ demeanor
Staff
• Overarching priorities not defined by Council makes it difficult for staff to all pull together on goals or accomplishments.
• Tendency to be too reaction oriented on very small issues.
• Excessive concerns about succession planning with staff, we have the ability to attract great candidates to bring ideas in the organization, and some obsess about succession planning. Frankly, we all can be replaced.
• Lack of courage to be honest when asking questions to determine if we should let go or modify of some outdated systems (ie: number and types of boards or commissions – could there be efficiencies by combining or elimination of some, cable TV local programming, having our own dispatch center, privatizing garbage collection are several examples)
• Many key factors are outside our control, the State, Market conditions, demographic changes, etc.
• Aging staff, retirements & transitions
• Need to continue to work at maintaining city wide perspective and avoid departmental “silos”.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 14
• Ability to keep up with the speed of technological change.
• Ability to reach out and connect with diverse populations.
• Sometimes excess focus on new bright shiny objects at the expense of maintaining basics
• Lack quantity / quality of staff to implement all imaginable good ideas
• Geographically decentralized city buildings / services makes service delivery less efficient
• A lack of focus and prioritization by the Council
• Difficult Council relationships (between each other)
• Still have some stove pipes/silos in the organization
• Trying to be all things for all people – it’s impossible
• A lack of willingness to adapt and change by certain departments
• Difficulty at times in saying “No” or at least “Yes, and”
• Sometimes there is a fear of failure. Some failure is a natural outcome of a creative, innovative organization.
• Aging physical infrastructure.
• Continuing institutional history/knowledge forward as staffing changes.
• Limited capacity to pursue all desired improvements.
• Our infrastructure is old and requires continuous and considerable investment to maintain.
• That there are unlimited opportunities for reinvestment and limited financial resources available.
• That staff will be unable to always understand what/how related to community priorities and needs despite supportive council.
• Lack of performance measures, benchmarks, KPI’s, CSF’s, etc.
• Excessive, long term workloads
• Slow technology integration / upgrades - the world is changing faster than us
• No priority setting - desire to do it all and now
• Too much micro management, team management, and meetings
• Emphasis placed on wrong type of training
• Aversion to risk
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 15
• Policy adoption based on ward need vs. overall community need
• I think that one of its weaknesses is that it continues to look for perceived new trends. Instead of following its gut and realize that as a City we are on the cutting edge with what we do and our in fact the new trend.
• Being a first ring suburb our housing stock and infrastructure is older. We need to get improving things so that we don’t become like other first ring suburbs. Keeping and attracting families to the City of St. Louis Park is important. If we don’t keep us with new and redeveloped areas and facilities, we could lost resident support.
• Since every organization is only as strong as our weakest link, we have to work together to provide quality service. We have or are very close to reaching a point where we need to add staff if we continue to add service. Quantity can’t win out over quality.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 16
Appendix III SWOT Results – Opportunities
Council
• To seize the economic and social advantages that greater urbanization and LRT will bring to us. Keep I mind though that our strength is also our greatest weakness and that these large scale changes will bring challenges and if we screw them up our opportunity will become our folly.
• Engaged and organized residents
• Recognizing changing demographic composition of SLP – trends toward older and more racially diverse residents – and integrating these groups more into the fabric of the community and providing services accordingly
• SW LRT
• Infrastructure builds –Hwy 100, Louisiana and 7
• Continued development potential
• Changing demographics of residents-finding new ways to respond to new and/or greater needs
• We have a community that largely trusts it’s leadership to deliver on the priorities it sets. That means that they are willing to let us take them further than they normally would be willing to go. We need to be less risk averse and challenge ourselves.
• Greater integration of neighborhood leaders into our work. Need to push those neighborhoods without leaders to get them and those with leaders to do more than just bake sales and plant exchanges.
• Economic development and jobs from light rail – Transit Oriented Development.
• Continued strong communications with the public
• Strong partnership with the School District
• Strong partnership with the business community
• Light Rail and development around the stations
Staff
• Light rail
• Upgrade to Highway 100 (finally)
• Location, location, location
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 17
• Strong location in the Metro, strong market conditions for our location and the closely knit, walkable, connected community that we are.
• Opportunity to build “SLP 3.0” around SWLRT stations, Hwy 100, West End/i-394; compact, walkable, transit oriented, relatively high-density neighborhoods in the vicinity of SWLRT stations.
• Redevelopment of our aging industrial areas into mixed-use areas attractive to the emerging generations as places to live and work.
• Location
• Strong reputation as a first-ring community
• Health services industry (if we can build on it, and attract related industries)
• SW LRT (and related development)
• SWLRT and all of the possibilities that brings to the community
• Leveraging our location – market, market, market
• Working more closely with the School District on marketing
• Continue to grow our neighborhoods and utilize them more as an asset (many benefits including building future leaders/ city council members etc.)
• Incredible redevelopment opportunities throughout the community.
• Make use of the “Boomers” who have retired and could serve as a volunteer resource for the City/community.
• Positive cultural change in the organization as new staff join.
• Continuing investment in redevelopment.
• Location, location, location.
• To anticipate and address future change cooperatively with the community rather than wait for community outcry that something is wrong or broken. Continue to tap into engaged and participative residents/neighborhoods to promote quality of life priorities as they define them
• Technology improvements
• SWLRT implementation
• N-S Transportation route need
• Staff turnover / replacement
• Vision update
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 18
• Its greatest opportunity is the fact that the City gets to do a do over. Because of its location as a first ring suburb and close proximity to Minneapolis it has become a prime redevelopment location. This is due because as a City, it has been forward thinking in the maintenance of its infrastructure so that it does not have to spend time fixing what is broken and can build to the future.
• The residents and Council have supported new ideas. This is huge when it comes to setting direction for the future. Residents want more services and potentially more facilities.
• There are many opportunities for future redevelopment of areas since our previous ones have been successful. Let’s keep building on the success we have.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 19
Appendix IV SWOT Results- Threats
Council
• Decline of infrastructure
• Crime
• Decline of our housing stock
• Resting on our laurels
• Touting our past successes and the awards we have won rather than continuing to grow and change
• Aging population
• Legislative whims
• At times the council is dysfunctional and has weak leadership. We should be providing clear direction n to the staff based on the Carver governance model rather than the “we’ll listen to whoever whines the loudest” model. We fail in that regard on a somewhat regular and frightening basis now. We allow tiny parochial minorities to govern our policy and look only to the next meeting for our vision rather than to the next generation.
o The fundamental dichotomy here is whether we view ourselves as advocates for a constituency or an arbiter of competing opinions. We can’t figure that out and while we pay homage to the Carver model we frankly allow our identity crisis to ooze its way into our decisional process.
o The worst fear is that we cannot fix this because our residents don’t want us to. They don’t want us to listen to all of them they want us to listen to only them – to the exclusion of all other opinions to the contrary and they’ll do almost anything to make sure we don’t. They’ll misstate, misrepresent and excoriate anyone who adheres to the carver model and insists on listening to every opinion before making a decision. We have done a perfectly lousy job of instilling that basic understanding of the process in people.
o At the end of the day most people can’t handle the truth – they want us to essentially lie to them and tell them what they want to hear no matter what it is and then blame somebody else when it doesn’t come true.
o The question for us is whether we now abandon the model to which we have prayed all these years but have never truly implemented or practiced and go back to the politics as usual model or whether we have the will to adhere to
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 20
our stated principle and enforce it not only among ourselves but on our residents as well. Leadership is defined not by how well we stand up to our adversaries but rather by how well we stand up to our friends.
• Once I leave we may start to recover and get back to what the residents really want and we can stop this Quixotic dancing bear lunacy. It was a great idea on paper but in the real world it turned out not to be what our residents and businesses really wanted out of their elected representatives. For trying to create that utopian vision of governmental decision-making I will be eternally sorry. Mark Twain said it best, in theory there is no difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is.
• Changing definition of livable community (i.e. walkability…)
• Failure to effectively integrate new residents/immigrants into our community.
• Letting light rail get run into the ground and letting light rail run us into the ground.
• Overcommitting ourselves financially to projects. We’ve done a good job with this but need to remain vigilant with the sidewalks and possible civic center coming online.
Staff
• State or Federal mandates current or future
• Maintenance of single-family small housing stock built in 40’s – 50’s as they turn over with aging community. (keeping them single family and not turned to rental)
• Handling of freight rail and light rail
• Maintaining aging housing stock (rental and owner-occupied).
• Aging infrastructure.
• Housing (if we wish to attract families)
• Schools (if we don’t promote their high quality)
• Preparing for continuing climate change (as best we can at a local level)
• A weakening of the core cities, especially Minneapolis. For us to be successful we need a strong Mpls.
• A declining or weak School District. For us/the community to be successful and vibrant we need to continue to have a strong School District. There are many positive ripple effects that come from that (we currently have a strong school district)
• Aging demographics – do we REALLY understand what that will mean in terms of impacts on our community and how we handle service delivery?
• Not anticipating change and what it will mean – and then adjusting and adapting.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 21
• Letting ourselves get torn apart over the freight rail issue
• Aging infrastructure
• The City’s resource commitment to Reilly Tar is a huge drain
• Continued racial/ethnic diversification over time. This is a threat only if we do not embrace and address this in a positive and proactive way
• Changing public sentiment about government role.
• Failure to maintaining private/public physical structures.
• Deterioration of schools.
• State Legislative actions.
• Loss of clear direction in anticipating and managing change and development.
• Lack of resources, which has not been an issue in the recent past, to deliver on priorities expressed by the community.
• Increased government mandates and regulations (environmentally based)
• Requests for specialized, individual services by residents ( I want it my way)
• Lean staffing with significant staff turnover expected
• Creation of an Environmental Advisory Commission
• Moving forward so fast that we forget to look back and make sure that everyone has the resources they need.
• Not maintaining a feeling safety in the community.
• Failure of the educational system caused by changes in demographics and diversity.
• Our greatest threat is in letting special interest groups have too much of a voice. We need to listen to everyone and then do what is best for the community. We can’t be all things to all people. Which environmental areas should we focus on? We will not make some residents happy no matter what we do. It is potentially a big threat to the City to listen to the few if there isn’t a significant benefit to the many.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 22
Appendix V Highest Priorities – from Questionnaire Responses
Council
• The greatest challenge is now and has always been how we deal with the inevitability of change. How do you anticipate it? Plan for it? Today it’s dealing with the inevitability of LRT and the freight rail that will stay in SLP somewhere.
• How we deal with aging infrastructure.
• Diversity of population – age and ethnicity. SLP is poised to become much more urban in the near future.
• Resolving freight rail/LRT in manner consistent with established city resolutions/policy
• Ensuring that city attracts and retains families with children, and has sufficient move-up housing to accommodate them
• Building a community center and establishing its programs in a manner which attracts widespread participation among residents of diverse demographic groups – including readily available transit to/from the center
• SW LRT
• Mentoring/training new leaders in org and community
• Maintaining and enhancing infrastructure.
• Integrate light rail into our city in a way that our residents can accept.
• Manage the balance of housing stock in the city with past and pending development.
• Finding another large scale “anchor” business other than Health Partners because they can do their work just about anywhere.
• Starting the next Visioning process
• Light Rail and what comes with it (Development)
• The possible Community/Civic Center
Staff
• Decisions regarding SWLRT and Freight Rail and planning for this for our operations.
• Continue collaboration with SLP school district with current superintendent resigning and new one to be hired in the upcoming year.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 23
• Highway 100
• SWLRT/FR implementation
• SW Corridor, West End, I-394 redevelopment.
• Housing Maintenance.
• Expanding sidewalk & trails and ability to get places without using a car.
• SW LRT
• Community Center
• Maintain current fiscal strength
• Properly positioning ourselves to take advantage of SWLRT as much as possible
• Continue the strong focus on infrastructure replacement/repairs and private redevelopment
• Continue to grow and evolve the sense of community – “connect and engage this community”
• Continue a strong focus on neighborhoods
• Being perceived as a Safe Community
• Stay on the path with service, maintenance, and development programs.
• Awareness of environmental changes and possible implications.
• Remain flexible perspective and operations in order to adapt as changes occur.
• Continue to redevelop in a responsible way reflecting the will of the community and within the financial constraints existing.
• Continue to look forward 5-10 years in projecting costs and work load involved in responding to priorities of the community.
• Continue to recognize the changing demographics of the community and maintain open communication which results in clear understanding in quality of life priorities which may change as demographics change.
• Manage staff turnover / replacements
• Learn to limit activities - set priorities
• Manage implementation of major projects and related activities
• Continue to support planning for redevelopment.
• Maintain a safe community.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 24
• Assist school district when possible to help it maintain its current high level of excellence.
• Being a connected and engaged community the potential future of a Community Center, sidewalk and trail plan and keeping up with our parks and other City owned places where people gather.
• Environment issues- this is very broad and encompasses storm water management, surface water management, wildlife control, forestry, environmental education, promoting green initiatives through City facilities as well as private residents, and there are more areas in this. This really needs to be defined so staff knows what the outcomes should be.
• Providing redevelopment in areas that are in need of it and maintaining a good housing stock (diverse and well maintained). I think that public art and building architecture fall into this too.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 25
Appendix VI Strengths-Opportunities
Strengths – prioritized:
• Great Staff
• Innovative
• Financially Sound
• Well-Maintained Infrastructure
• Diverse Community
Opportunities- prioritized:
• ECON/LRT/TOD/REDEV
o “New Community of the 21st Century
o Built of health industry, I 394/Hwy 100
• Changing Demographics and Markets
• Location Mkt.
• Continue to Grow Neighborhood Organizations & Leadership
• Community Trust to Do/Try New Things
Strengths & Opportunities- combined to leverage strengths/ strategic opportunities
• Innovation
• Well-Maintained Infrastructure
• Diversity
• Great Staff & Great Council
• Financially Sound
• Freedom to Take Risks
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 26
Appendix VII Weaknesses- Threats
Weaknesses- summarized:
• Succession Planning (Internal Infrastructure)
• Staff Resources
• Risk Engagement
• City-School Partnership
• Policy Expectation
o Clarification: Council → Staff
• Engaging Diversity – part of future SLP
Threats- summarized:
• Declining/Deterioration of Infrastructure – Public/Private
• SWLRT/Freight Rail
o How It Is Handled with the Community
o Lasting Impacts
• Anticipating and Responding to Demographic Changes and How We Handle It
• Unhealthy Sense of Entitlement (and it is growing)
• Concern about Potential for Schools Declining
Weaknesses & Threats – combined to minimize weaknesses/expose challenges
• Demographic Changes & Diversity
• Infrastructure both Public and Private
• School Partnership
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 27
Appendix VI
Summary- Strategic Challenges/Issues to confront
-SWOT analysis
Groups Summary- SWOT process
• Operations Delivery/Responses
• Diversity: Managing Response, Encouraging
• Infrastructure – address decline
o People/Internal
o Improve/Innovate
• Partnership – Stable Schools = Stable Cities
• Redevelopment
o Housing
o LRT Leverage
o Health Industry
• Innovation Focus
Additional issues meriting future focus
• Focused Redevelopment
o Housing Type
o LRT
• Diversity
• Innovation
• Maintaining Infrastructure Quality
• Service Delivery for Customers/Citizens: Responsive and Responsible
• Community Engagement
• Leadership Effectiveness
• SWLRT
Balanced Scorecard was presented as a means by which to determine whether a broad
range of outcomes is in place F=Financial; C=Customer; O=Operations; L/W=
Learning/Workforce
F C
O L/W
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 28
St. Louis Park is Committed to Being a Connected and Engaged Community
2 Year Key Outcome Indicators 2 Year Strategic Initiatives
• Planning is complete or construction Complete construction of Hwy 7/Lou. interchange
has started/been completed
on major infrastructure improvements Complete prep. for const. of Hwy 100 project
Undertake Connect the Park Project
Determine course of action on fiber optic initiative
Continue planning for enhanced N/S Connections
• Preparations completed for const. Develop/implement community engagement plan
of SWLRT in 2015 for Municipal Consent process and beyond
Continue station area planning to insure community
cohesion/connections, quality
redev. and infrastructure imp’s.
Resolve freight rail issue consistent with adopted
City policy
• Decision made on construction Complete site, program, operations and cost
of Community Center analysis.
• Assessment completed of impacts In concert with School District, HRC and others, bring
of demographic shifts coming to SLP in subject experts to help identify impacts and
develop plan for future.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up
Page 29
St Louis Park is Committed to Being a Leader in Environmental Stewardship. We
will Increase Environmental Consciousness and Responsibility in all areas of City
Business
2 Year Key Outcome Indicators 2 Year Strategic Initiatives
• Environment/Sustainability Complete formal process to establish
Commission is fully functioning commission and determine staffing
and engaged approach.
Develop Work Plan and priorities
• Plan in place and const. has Finalize plan, funding approach and
started on major storm water undertake public process
imp’s
• 2013-2018 Solid Waste contract Undertake comprehensive communications
has been finalized and organics and education program, particularly relating
collection has been implemented to organics.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 30
St. Louis Park is Committed to Providing a Well-Maintained and Diverse Housing
Stock
2 Year Key Outcome Indicators 2 Year Strategic Initiatives
• The City’s adopted Housing Policy
is reviewed and updated including
consideration of SWLRT redev.
opportunities.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 31
St Louis Park is Committed to Promoting and Integrating Arts, Culture, and
Community Aesthetics in all City Initiatives, including Implementation where
Appropriate
2 Year Key Outcome Indicators 2 Year Strategic Initiatives
• A plan has been developed
to incorporate public art and the
SLP “brand” at the City’s three LRT
Stations
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 32
Mission
&
Value Statements
Vision
Statement
Vision SLP
Strategic Direction’s
Key Outcome
Indicators
Strategic
Initiatives
Our Mission
Deliver responsive
municipal services to
ensure a safe, welcoming
and vital community now
and in the future.
Our Values
Respect
We are stewards of the
public trust who treat our
colleagues and those we
serve courteously, openly
and equitably.
Contribution
We are committed to
lifelong learning, personal
accountability, and
collaboration to ensure
our best contribution to
this community.
Stewardship
We are responsible for
our community’s human,
environmental and
financial resources.
St. Louis Park is
committed to being a
connected and engaged
community.
St. Louis Park is
committed to being a
leader in environmental
stewardship. We will
increase environmental
consciousness and
responsibility in all
areas of city business.
St. Louis Park is
committed to providing
a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
St. Louis Park is
committed to promoting
and integrating arts,
culture, and community
aesthetics in all City
initiatives, including
implementation where
appropriate.
St. Louis Park is a
Community of Choice
for a Lifetime.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 5)
Title: City Council Workshop Follow-Up Page 33
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Written Report: 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Highway 100 Project Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. If Council has any specific questions or
concerns regarding the information shared in this report, please contact staff.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time
SUMMARY:
On December 3, 2012, the City Council granted municipal consent for the Highway 100 layout.
Since that time, MnDOT has moved ahead further with preliminary design of the roadway itself
and the following: Completion of the Environmental Assessment (EA) public hearing and
comment period, completion of the noise wall determination process with adjacent property
owners, identifying and addressing utility issues and needs within the project corridor, and
commencement of the visual quality and public art process. Additional details regarding the
above topics are provided in the attached Discussion page.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
As described in MnDOT’s request, the City’s share of the MnDOT project cost was estimated to
be approximately $60,000. As the City continues to work with MnDOT through final design,
including visual quality and public art considerations, the City’s share of the project cost may
increase, depending on the level of improvements desired by the city. In addition to cost
participation in the actual MnDOT project, the City also has several other obligations related to
this project:
Engineering Expenses:
Previous Expenses and Studies $90,000
Additional Engineering Expenses $150,000
Bridge Widening Costs (6’ Striped Shoulders) $137,000
Utility Relocations or Improvements:
Stormwater Facilities $600,000
Sanitary Sewer Facilities $1,000,000
Water Facilities $900,000
Utica Ave Reconstruction $250,000
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Scott Brink, City Engineer
Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 6) Page 2
Title: Highway 100 Project Update
DISCUSSION
Noise Walls and Environmental Assessment
MnDOT held a public hearing for the Environmental Assessment (EA) on January 8, 2013. The
comment period began on December 24, 2012 and ended on January 23, 2013. MnDOT also
completed the public process and balloting procedure for determining if noise walls should
remain in the project. As a result of the process, noise walls will remain in the project for both
sides of the Highway from Highway 7 to roughly 26th Street.
Visual Quality and Project Advisory Groups:
Beginning on December 6, 2012, monthly meetings for the Visual Quality Process have been
conducted to eventually develop a Visual Quality Process Manual for the project. A Visual
Quality Manual Group or committee (VQM) comprised of representatives from adjacent
neighborhoods, institutions adjacent to the highway, staff, the City’s artist, and other interests
has been assembled to provide this input. The meetings to date have articulated community
values and objectives to ensure sensitivity to visual quality and aesthetics (including public art)
in the design. This input will be fed into the aesthetic design of key project elements such as the
bridges, abutments, and noise walls with concurrent consideration of public art. This process is
expected to continue on through June/July, 2013.
In addition to the Visual Quality Manual group, a Hwy 100 Public Art Committee was
established to specifically deal with public art opportunities in the Hwy 100 corridor. The
following community members are serving on the Public Art Committee: George Hagemann,
Carl Robertson, Jan Loftus, Richard Person and Mary Storm. Carl, Jan and Mary also serve on
the VQM group and will be a liaison between the two groups. This group also includes staff
members Cindy Walsh, Sean Walther, Marney Olson, Scott Brink, and Forecast Public Art
Consultant Jack Becker. MnDOT project manager April Crockett and consultant Michael
Schroeder were also present for the initial public art meeting.
The public art committee met January 16th and discussed potential opportunities for public art.
The public art committee will work closely with the VQM group to make sure opportunities are
explored and mesh well with their manual. Preliminary designs for the bridge and noise walls
were presented at the February VQM meeting. The next public art meeting will explore art
opportunities based on these draft designs. Please note that MnDOT staff appear to have
concerns about the concept of using an artist for designing and implementing public art into
the project. A conference call with MnDOT is scheduled for February 22 to discuss this
further.
Project Advisory Committee
MnDOT is also working to form a Project Advisory Committee. This group will meet on a
biannual basis through the design phase and more frequently during actual construction. The
purpose of this committee will be to allow MnDOT to provide current project information and
receive feedback from stakeholders to help better understand and address the many issues that
arise during a project of this magnitude. Specific committee members have not yet been
determined, but it is expected that members will include a wide variety of interests, including
representatives of the many agencies involved (both elected representatives and staff), such as
the City, County, State, the business community, and other stakeholders as appropriate.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 6) Page 3
Title: Highway 100 Project Update
General Preliminary Design
MnDOT and City staff met to identify the City’s public utilities within the project corridor and
address relocation, replacement, and or other needs for sanitary sewer, water, and drainage
facilities. Private utilities, including an MCES force main replacement, are also being identified
and considered in the design and eventual construction.
Project Schedule:
Based on the current project status and progress made to date, the following schedule is
anticipated at this time:
Development of Construction Plans and Specifications Fall 2012 - September 2014
EA Process Completed Early 2013
Right of Way Acquisition May 2013 - May 2014
Open Bids and Award Contract May 2014
Construction Late 2014 - 2016
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Written Report: 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: SW LRT Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: This is an update on activities occurring related to SW LRT. Several concurrent
actions are taking place, including the beginning of both Preliminary Engineering (PE) and
Transitional Station Area Action Plans (TSAAP). In addition the City is undertaking its own
activities in a parallel process with the PE and TSAAP. A summary of activities and a map of
PE technical issue areas is attached.
City staff is involved in the PE and TSAAP processes, and much staff time is being devoted to
committees, tasks and meetings related to the engineering and planning. Thus far, only issue
identification and information sharing has occurred. As information is developed and potential
decisions come forward, staff will discuss the various items and issues with the City Council as
they arise, typically monthly or more as needed.
The Business Advisory Committee (BAC) and the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) are
serving both the PE and the TSAAP jointly. In addition a community outreach and engagement
framework is being created, with each city supplementing information and meetings with its own
engagement process. More information on this piece will be forthcoming.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: SW LRT Summary of Current Activities
PE Map of Technical Issues
Chart of SW LRT Processes
Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 7) Page 2
Title: SW LRT Update
BACKGROUND: The Metropolitan Council has hired engineering firms to begin PE, with the
intent that designs for the LRT line will be ready for municipal review and consent by the 4th
quarter of 2013. Hennepin County Community Works, along with the cities, is also undertaking
station area planning through the TSAAP process (funded mainly by a US Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) grant) for Comprehensive Planning and Community Engagement activities.
The TSAAP process is expected to be completed by the end of this year also.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: In advance and parallel to the planning and engineering
that other agencies are undertaking, the City has created an Advisory Committee for the
Beltline station area, and last year staff and the committee completed a set of Design
Guidelines primarily funded through a Metropolitan Council grant (located at:
http://www.stlouispark.org/webfiles/file/community-dev/beltline_guidelines_final_11_1_2012.pdf).
Work with the Advisory Committee continues this year on access and circulation issues. It is
expected a report from this work will be given to the City Council on these activities in April.
NEXT STEPS: An Advisory Committee for the Louisiana Ave. station area will be formed
shortly to work on activities primarily funded by a Metropolitan Council pre-development grant
for design guidelines and stormwater planning. An Advisory Committee for the Wooddale area
will also be formed. All of the station area Advisory Committees will be utilized as one of the
outreach and community engagement vehicles for citizen review and input on PE and TSAAP
planning.
SW LRT Summary of Current Activities February 25, 2013
1. Preliminary Engineering (PE) – Met Council Southwest Project Office
a. PE consultants on board (collecting data, survey work, soils
information, testing alternate layouts and alignments)
b. Issues Resolutions Group (IRG) staff meetings began week of 2-11-
13 (See attached SW LRT PE Technical Issues Map)
i. St. Louis Park general
ii. Freight Rail issues
2. Transitional Station Area Action Plans (TSAAP) – Hennepin County
Community Works
a. TSAAP staff charrette completed week of February 5, 2013 (looked
at information and options relating to stations, potential for
redevelopment, etc.)
b. Community Engagement and Outreach Framework Plan being
developed
3. Station Areas – St. Louis Park
a. Beltline Station Area – Advisory Committee continues meeting on
access and circulation; report to Council in April
b. Louisiana Station Area – Hiring consultant and creating Advisory
Committee for Design Guidelines, stormwater planning using Met
Council Pre-development grant – 1st meeting in March
c. Wooddale – Creating Advisory Committee to review and provide
input on PE and TSAAP plans
4. Communications/engagement plan
a. TSAAP consultants creating framework
b. City creating community outreach and engage plan – (Community
Development , Community Liaison, Communication Coordinator)
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 7)
Title: SW LRT Update Page 3
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 7)
Title: SW LRT Update Page 4
Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT)
SW LRT “PROJECT”
Met Council
SW LRT COMMUNITY WORKS
Hennepin County
Work Program:
▪ Station Area Planning
- Access and circulation
- Infrastructure planning
- Development planning
- Coordinate community priorities
with project office
▪ Provide capital improvement funding
Deliver SW LRT line Maximize community and
economic benefits of SWLRT
Corridor Management Committee
▪ Elected/appointed officials from
participating agencies
▪ Mayor Jacobs
Steering Committee
▪ Elected/appointed officials from
participating agencies
▪ Council Member Mavity
Committees
▪ TPAC
▪ IRTs
Technical Implementation Committee
▪ Staff from participating agencies
▪ Subcommittees on funding, access,
marketing, etc.
Southwest Project Office
Work Program:
• Preliminary Engineering
• Final EIS
• Final Design
• Construction LRT
• LRT related infrastructure
CITY
St. Louis Park
Prepare station
areas for changes
City Council
Staff
Station Area Advisory
Committees
Work Program:
• Immediate area of station
• Station area land use planning
• Development and
Redevelopment
• Circulation system
Business Advisory
Committee
Community Advisory
Committee
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 7)
Title: SW LRT Update Page 5
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Written Report: 8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Background Checks Ordinance Amendment
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. The purpose of this report is to inform the
Council of a proposed amendment to the City’s criminal history (background) checks ordinance.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council wish to amend the city code regarding
background checks to meet the minimum requirements established by the BCA and LMC?
SUMMARY: Since 2008, law enforcement agencies have been permitted to conduct Minnesota
criminal history background checks for employment and licensing purposes if an ordinance has
been enacted requiring that the background check be conducted.
The City’s Police Department has been conducting general criminal history checks for
employment and licensing by authority of an ordinance since 1999. The Bureau of Criminal
Apprehension (BCA) has worked with the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) to identify
specific requirements for an ordinance authorizing the checks, and Minnesota Justice
Information Services (MNJIS) auditors have been finding cities whose ordinance does not meet
the agreed on requirements.
City Attorney Tom Scott has reviewed the existing ordinance and made the attached
recommendation for the City’s ordinance to meet the minimum requirements established by the
BCA and LMC. If there are no objections, staff will return for first reading of the proposed
ordinance at the March 4, 2013 City Council meeting.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Proposed Ordinance
Prepared by: Ray French, Administrative Services Intern
Reviewed by: Lori Dreier, Lieutenant
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 8) Page 2
Title: Background Checks Ordinance Amendment
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Since 2008, law enforcement agencies have been permitted to conduct
Minnesota criminal history checks for employment and licensing purposes if an ordinance has
been enacted requiring that the background check be conducted. Minnesota Justice Information
Services (MNJIS) auditors have been finding cities and counties conducting criminal history
background checks by authority of a resolution rather than an ordinance or whose ordinance does
not meet the agreed on requirements. The Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) has worked
with the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) to identify specific requirements for an ordinance
authorizing the checks.
Effective Jan. 1, 2015, a city or county using a resolution as the basis for a local criminal history
check or whose ordinance does not meet the minimum requirements established by the BCA and
the League will receive a sanction as part of the audit process. This includes the requirement to
stop running local checks until an acceptable ordinance is in place. MNJIS is providing advance
notice of this change to give cities and counties wishing to convert from a resolution to an
ordinance or needing to update an ordinance ample time to do so.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The City’s Police Department has been conducting general
criminal history checks for employment and licensing by authority of an ordinance since 1999.
City Attorney Tom Scott has reviewed the existing ordinance and made the attached
recommendation for the City’s ordinance to meet the minimum requirements established by the
BCA and LMC. The proposed ordinance includes:
• Purpose of ordinance
• Law enforcement required to do the check
• List of licenses/positions to be checked
• Limited to Minnesota Computerized Criminal History query
• All data kept at law enforcement
• Summary of results to specified persons/roles within government
• Written consent from applicant required that complies with M.S.A. Ch. 13
• City will not reject applicant unless in M.S.A. § 364.09 or unless crime directly related to
position and may have jail sentence
• If applicant is rejected, applicant told grounds and reasons, grievance procedure; date for
reapplication; that all evidence of rehabilitation will be considered.
NEXT STEPS: If there are no objections, staff will return for first reading of the proposed
ordinance at the March 4, 2013 City Council meeting.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 8) Page 3
Title: Background Checks Ordinance Amendment
ORDINANCE NO. ___-13
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
CODE OF ORDINANCES SECTIONS 16-31 AND 16-33
RELATING TO CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. That Section 16-31 of the Code of Ordinances of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 16-31. License applicantsApplicants for City Licenses.
(a) Purpose and intent. It is the purpose and intent of the city council to provide for the
public health, safety and welfare of city residents by providing a system at the local level for
criminal history background investigations of all applicants for certain licenses as identified by
the city manager.
(b) Consent/waiver form. The city may obtain information needed to conduct such
investigation on a city-approved license application which shall also include an informed
consent/waiver form executed by the prospective licensee.
(c) Police department to perform investigations. The city council authorizes the city
police department to perform criminal history background investigations on applicants for those
licenses identified by the city manager by retrieving and reviewing data maintained in the
criminal justice information system computers.
(a) Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of this section is to establish regulations
that will allow law enforcement access to Minnesota’s Computerized Criminal History
information for specified non-criminal purposes of licensing background checks.
(b) Criminal History License Background Investigations. The St. Louis Park Police
Department is hereby authorized, as the exclusive entity within the city, to do a criminal history
background investigation on the applicants for the following licenses within the city:
(1) charitable gambling
(2) massage therapy
(3) massage therapy establishment
(4) pawnbroker
(5) peddler or solicitor
(6) any other license which the city code requires a background check as part of the
license application process.
(c) In conducting the criminal history background investigation in order to screen license
applicants, the Police Department is authorized to access data maintained in the Minnesota
Bureau of Criminal Apprehensions Computerized Criminal History information system in
accordance with BCA policy. Any data that is accessed and acquired shall be maintained at the
Police Department under the care and custody of the chief law enforcement official or his or her
designee. A summary of the results of the Computerized Criminal History data may be released
by the Police Department to the licensing authority, including the City Council, City Manager,
City Clerk or other city staff involved in the license approval process.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 8) Page 4
Title: Background Checks Ordinance Amendment
(d) Before the investigation is undertaken, the applicant must authorize the Police
Department by written consent to undertake the investigation. The written consent must fully
comply with the provisions of M.S.A. Chapter 13 regarding the collection, maintenance and use
of the information. Except for the positions set forth in M.S.A. § 364.09, the city will not reject
an applicant for a license on the basis of the applicant’s prior conviction unless the crime is
directly related to the license sought and the conviction is for a felony, gross misdemeanor, or
misdemeanor with a jail sentence. If the city rejects the applicant’s request on this basis, the city
shall notify the applicant in writing of the following:
(1) The grounds and reasons for the denial.
(2) The applicant complaint and grievance procedure set forth in M.S.A. § 364.06.
(3) The earliest date the applicant may reapply for the license.
(4) That all competent evidence of rehabilitation will be considered upon reapplication.
SECTION 2. That Section 16-33 of the Code of Ordinances of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Sec. 16-33. Volunteers and new city employeesApplicants for City Employment and
Volunteer Positions.
(a) Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall
have the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates
a different meaning:
Background check means a search of the criminal history data maintained in the criminal
justice information system computers.
Informed consent/waiver form means a consent/waiver form approved by the city and
meeting the requirements of M.S.A. § 13.05, subd. 4(d), as amended.
(b) Purpose and intent. It is the purpose and intent of this section to ensure safe park and
recreation programs, and to protect the overall public health, safety, welfare and morale of city
residents by providing a system at the local level for background checks of city volunteers and
new city employees through use of the criminal justice information system computers.
(c) City volunteer background check. The city manager considering use of a volunteer
may request the police department to conduct a background check on a prospective volunteer for
any city sponsored event or for any volunteer position with the city. The request shall be
accompanied by an informed consent/waiver form executed by the prospective volunteer. The
police department shall perform the background check by retrieving and reviewing data
maintained in the criminal justice information system computers.
(d) New employees. The city manager may request the police department to conduct a
background check on a prospective new employee. The request shall be accompanied by an
informed consent/waiver form executed by the prospective employee. The police department
shall perform the background check by retrieving and reviewing data maintained in the criminal
justice information system computers.
(e) City immunity. The city is immune from any civil or criminal liability that might
otherwise arise, based on the accuracy or completeness of records it receives from the criminal
justice information system computers, if the city acts in good faith.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 8) Page 5
Title: Background Checks Ordinance Amendment
(a) Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of this section is to establish regulations
that will allow law enforcement access to Minnesota’s Computerized Criminal History information
for specified non-criminal purposes of employment and volunteer background checks.
(b) Criminal History Employment and Volunteer Background Investigations. The St.
Louis Park Police Department is hereby required, as the exclusive entity within the city, to do a
criminal history background investigation on the applicants for all part-time or full-time
employment and volunteer positions with the city, unless the city manager concludes that a
background investigation is not needed.
(c) In conducting the criminal history background investigation in order to screen
employment and volunteer applicants, the Police Department is authorized to access data
maintained in the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehensions Computerized Criminal History
information system in accordance with BCA policy. Any data that is accessed and acquired shall
be maintained at the Police Department under the care and custody of the chief law enforcement
official or his or her designee. A summary of the results of the Computerized Criminal History
data may be released by the Police Department to the hiring authority, including the city council,
the city manager, or other city staff involved in the hiring process.
(d) Before the investigation is undertaken, the applicant must authorize the Police
Department by written consent to undertake the investigation. The written consent must fully
comply with the provisions of M.S.A. Chapter 13 regarding the collection, maintenance and use
of the information. Except for the positions set forth in M.S.A. § 364.09, the city will not reject
an applicant for employment on the basis of the applicant’s prior conviction unless the crime is
directly related to the position of employment sought and the conviction is for a felony, gross
misdemeanor, or misdemeanor with a jail sentence. If the city rejects the applicant’s request on
this basis, the city shall notify the applicant in writing of the following:
(1) The grounds and reasons for the denial.
(2) The applicant complaint and grievance procedure set forth in M.S.A. § 364.06.
(3) The earliest date the applicant may reapply for employment.
(4) That all competent evidence of rehabilitation will be considered upon reapplication.
SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
First Reading March 4, 2013
Second Reading March 18, 2013
Date of Publication March 28, 2013
Date Ordinance takes effect April 12, 2013
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 18, 2013
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Written Report: 9
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: January 2013 Monthly Financial Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: The Monthly Financial Report provides summary information for the General
Fund and the Park & Recreation Fund of revenues and departmental expenditures and a
comparison of budget to actual throughout the year.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Actual expenditures should generally run
about 8.5% of the annual budget in January. Currently, the General Fund has expenditures
totaling 7.6% of the adopted budget and the Park and Recreation Fund expenditures are at 6.4%.
Revenues tend to be harder to gauge in this same way due to the timing of when they are
received, examples of which include property taxes and State aid payments (Police & Fire,
DOT/Highway, PERA Aid, etc.).
There are very few variances at this early point in the year. A few brief comments are noted
below.
General Fund
Revenues:
• In January, 29% of the license and permit revenues have been received in the General
Fund. As in prior years, this is because most 2013 liquor and business license payments
have already been received. In the Administration Department, 94% or $233,000 of the
budgeted liquor license revenues, have been received. In the Inspections Department,
83% or approximately $335,000 of the business license revenues for the year have been
recorded, with most of the payments coming in late 2012 and deferred to 2013 to
accurately reflect the year that the license revenue is earned. Permit revenues are at 9%
of budget through January.
Expenditures:
• Administration is running slightly over budget temporarily at 9.3% because the League of
Minnesota Cities and Metro Cities membership fees were expensed in January.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Summary of Revenues & Expenditures
Prepared by: Darla Monson, Senior Accountant
Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Summary of Revenues - General Fund and Park & Recreation As of January 31, 2013 20132013201120112012201220132013 Balance YTD Budget BudgetActual Budget Unaudited Budget Jan YTD Remaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes15,426,072$ 15,372,076$ 15,998,292$ 15,944,792$ 16,314,802$ -$ 16,314,802$ 0.00% Licenses and Permits2,345,910 2,797,588 2,368,799 3,241,287 2,481,603 725,218 1,756,385 29.22% Fines & Forfeits328,200 281,047 328,150 317,675 335,150 - 335,150 0.00% Intergovernmental1,136,187 1,243,494 1,163,677 1,258,583 1,203,289 7,769 1,195,520 0.65% Charges for Services1,152,643 1,077,137 1,270,354 755,966 1,401,797 15,927 1,385,870 1.14% Miscellaneous Revenue100,150 129,142 111,650 102,934 114,200 12,047 102,153 10.55% Transfers In2,589,876 2,553,665 2,023,003 2,064,626 1,816,563 149,126 1,667,437 8.21% Investment Earnings200,000 203,282 125,000 - 150,000 150,000 0.00% Other Income4,750 22,686 3,450 5,846 4,700 1,990 2,710 42.34% Use of Fund BalanceTotal General Fund Revenues23,283,788$ 23,680,117$ 23,392,375$ 23,691,709$ 23,822,104$ 912,077$ 22,910,027$ 3.83%Park & Recreation Revenues: General Property Taxes4,000,561$ 4,000,561$ 4,171,506$ 4,171,506$ 4,342,922$ -$ 4,342,922$ 0.00% Licenses and Permits6,600 110 6,600 440 - 123 (123) 0.00% Intergovernmental77,652 208,536 68,902 89,744 96,902 775 96,127 0.80% Charges for Services1,095,250 1,082,163 1,070,750 1,079,593 1,073,400 56,866 1,016,534 5.30% Miscellaneous Revenue937,400 1,035,310 967,900 1,006,385 978,181 65,794 912,387 6.73% Other Income15,000 78,902 42,150 9,115 31,950 - 31,950 0.00%Total Park & Recreation Revenues6,132,463$ 6,405,582$ 6,327,808$ 6,356,783$ 6,523,355$ 123,558$ 6,399,797$ 1.89%Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 9) Title: January 2013 Monthly Financial ReportPage 2
20132013201120112012201220132013 Balance BudgetBudgetActual Budget Unaudited Budget Jan YTD Remaining to Actual %General Government: Administration889,798$ 825,168$ 1,012,554$ 974,680$ 877,099$ 81,199$ 795,900$ 9.26% Accounting612,964 624,573 641,691 636,578 657,592 40,689 616,903 6.19% Assessing500,141 506,426 517,840 515,895 543,855 47,407 496,448 8.72% Human Resources652,770 629,734 667,612 635,201 678,988 54,153 624,835 7.98% Community Development1,094,186 1,082,461 1,076,376 1,046,735 1,094,517 87,581 1,006,936 8.00% Facilities Maintenance1,114,551 955,880 1,083,128 929,096 1,074,920 50,835 1,024,085 4.73% Information Resources1,394,226 1,421,858 1,507,579 1,360,615 1,770,877 77,245 1,693,632 4.36% Communications & Marketing294,470 256,558 265,426 243,516 201,322 10,405 190,917 5.17% Community Outreach88,515 84,300 8,185 6,473 8,185 - 8,185 0.00%Total General Government6,641,621$ 6,386,958$ 6,780,391$ 6,348,789$ 6,907,355$ 449,514$ 6,457,841$ 6.51%Public Safety: Police7,208,512$ 6,943,375$ 7,273,723$ 7,068,425$ 7,443,637$ 630,545$ 6,813,092$ 8.47% Fire Protection3,164,344 3,061,962 3,346,931 3,236,847 3,330,263 267,888 3,062,375 8.04% Inspectional Services1,863,296 1,818,212 1,889,340 1,850,912 1,928,446 163,216 1,765,230 8.46%Total Public Safety12,236,152$ 11,823,549$ 12,509,994$ 12,156,184$ 12,702,346$ 1,061,648$ 11,640,698$ 8.36%Public Works: Public Works Administration829,698$ 803,259$ 389,783$ 375,277$ 393,054$ 29,314$ 363,740$ 7.46% Public Works Engineering846,032 816,280 927,337 931,171 940,479 73,533 866,946 7.82% Public Works Operations2,550,285 2,461,099 2,604,870 2,483,779 2,698,870 191,032 2,507,838 7.08%Total Public Works4,226,015$ 4,080,638$ 3,921,990$ 3,790,226$ 4,032,403$ 293,879$ 3,738,524$ 7.29%Non-Departmental: General 81,287$ -$ 60,956$ -$ -$ 0.00% Transfers Out900,000 - - - - 0.00% Tax Court Petitions180,000 - 180,000 - 180,000 - 180,000 0.00%Total Non-Departmental180,000$ 981,287$ 180,000$ 60,956$ 180,000$ -$ 180,000$ 0.00%Total General Fund Expenditures23,283,788$ 23,272,432$ 23,392,375$ 22,356,155$ 23,822,104$ 1,805,041$ 22,017,063$ 7.58%Park & Recreation:Organized Recreation1,239,230$ 1,266,774$ 1,305,747$ 1,335,461$ 1,317,526$ 84,054$ 1,233,472$ 6.38%Recreation Center1,442,447 1,424,076 1,466,246 1,497,061 1,463,224 70,775 1,392,449 4.84%Park Maintenance1,435,374 1,462,866 1,461,645 1,445,755 1,483,576 99,465 1,384,111 6.70%Westwood502,366 488,579 515,456 503,145 533,565 39,355 494,210 7.38%Environment371,324 396,664 390,009 381,714 430,876 26,438 404,438 6.14%Vehicle Maintenance1,141,722 1,300,708 1,188,705 1,274,180 1,294,588 95,315 1,199,273 7.36%Total Park & Recreation Expenditures6,132,463$ 6,339,666$ 6,327,808$ 6,437,317$ 6,523,355$ 415,401$ 6,107,954$ 6.37%Summary of Expenditures - General Fund and Park & RecreationAs of January 31, 2013 Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 9) Title: January 2013 Monthly Financial ReportPage 3
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: February 25, 2013
Written Report: 10
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Extension of Xcel and CPE Franchise Ordinances
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to extend the expiration date of Xcel’s and
CPE’s current franchise ordinances through the end of 2013?
SUMMARY: The City currently has franchise agreements with Xcel Energy (Xcel agreement
expires May 20, 2013) and with CenterPoint Energy (CPE agreement expires July 1, 2013).
Recently Xcel Energy staff informed us they need additional time to respond to our concerns
regarding their proposed future franchise ordinance and have requested their current ordinance
be extended through the end of this year to allow adequate time to finalize these discussions.
Staff finds this extension acceptable and has conveyed that request to CPE staff who are also
agreeable to extending their franchise through the end of the year.
Staff has developed the following steps and schedule for amending the current Xcel and CPE
franchise ordinances:
First Reading(s) March 4, 2013
Second Reading(s) (adopt ordinances and authorize publication) March 11, 2013
Submit Ordinances to Sun Sailor March 12, 2013
Ordinance Publication March 21, 2013
Ordinance Effective Date April 5, 2013
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Failure to extend the current franchise
ordinances will result in expiration of the current franchises leading to the loss of franchise fee
revenues (about $1.6 million) for our pavement management program.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 10) Page 2
Title: Extension of Xcel and CPE Franchise Ordinances
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND:
History
The City currently has franchise agreements with Xcel Energy (Xcel agreement expires May 20,
2013) and with CenterPoint Energy (CPE agreement expires July 1, 2013). Staff from these two
utilities approached City staff during 2012 to begin discussing renewal of their respective
franchise agreements.
The adoption of a new franchise ordinance was presented to the City Council at the July 23rd
Study Session, was followed up with a staff / Council discussion at the August 13th Study
Session, and a Public Hearing and first reading of the ordinance was conducted Monday, October
1st at which time second reading was set for October 15th. Due to several concerns identified by
Xcel and Council during first reading, a study session discussion was held on October 8th. On
October 15th second reading was continued to November 5th to allow time for Xcel and city staff
to revise the proposed ordinance. Due to the need for protracted discussions, 2nd reading of the
proposed ordinances was tabled on November 5th.
To prevent the undesirable expiration of the current Xcel franchise ordinance, both parties agreed
to extend the termination date of that ordinance by three (3) months from February 20, 2013
through May 19, 2013. First reading for the ordinance extension was held November 5th with 2nd
reading and adoption following on November 19th.
Recently Xcel Energy staff informed us they need additional time to respond to our concerns
regarding their proposed future franchise ordinance and have requested their current ordinance
be extended through the end of this year to allow adequate time to finalize these discussions.
Staff finds this extension acceptable and has conveyed that request to CPE staff who are also
agreeable to extending their franchise through the end of the year.
Adoption Process and Schedule
Staff has developed the following steps and schedule for amending the current Xcel and CPE
franchise ordinances:
First Reading(s) March 4, 2013
Second Reading(s) (adopt ordinances and authorize publication) March 11, 2013
Submit Ordinances to Sun Sailor March 12, 2013
Ordinance Publication March 21, 2013
Ordinance Effective Date April 5, 2013
Summary
Staff will be recommending that Council approve 1st readings which extend the Xcel and CPE
franchise ordinances through the end of 2013 and set 2nd reading for March 11th as per the
schedule outlined above.
Study Session Meeting of February 25, 2013 (Item No. 10) Page 3
Title: Extension of Xcel and CPE Franchise Ordinances
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATIONS:
The City’s Pavement Management Program is currently funded by franchise fee revenues,
collected for us by both Xcel and CPE, along with some general funds. Franchise fees can be
collected by a utility when the City has a franchise ordinance providing for this. Failure to
extend the current franchise expiration dates will result in expiration of the current franchise
agreements leading to the loss of franchise fee revenues for our pavement management program.
Based on current 2013 fees, total franchise fees generate approximately $1.6 million annually
(CPE - $615,144; Xcel -$996,578).