HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012/02/27 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
FEBRUARY 27, 2012
6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers
Discussion Items
1. 6:30 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 5 and March 12, 2012
2. 6:35 p.m. Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
3. 7:20 p.m. Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review
4. 8:05 p.m. Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)
5. 8:20 p.m. Council Policy Discussion – Recognition of Marriage Constitutional
Amendment
6. 8:30 p.m. Electronic Agenda
7. 9:15 p.m. Communications/Meeting Check-In
9:20 p.m. Adjourn
Written Reports
8. Business Park Zoning District
9. Community Recreation Facility Planning Update
10. Railroad Crossing Signal Replacements: West Lake Street/Library Lane – Project No.
2012-1304 and on Alabama Avenue – Project No. 2012-1305
11. January 2012 Monthly Financial Report
12. Recreational Fire Permits and Fees
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 Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 1
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 5 and March 12, 2012.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for a Special Study Session scheduled
for March 5 and the regularly scheduled Study Session on March 12, 2012.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council agree with the agendas as proposed?
BACKGROUND:
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 a Special Study Session scheduled for March 5 and the regularly scheduled Study
Session on March 12, 2012.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
None.
Attachment: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 5 and March 12, 2012
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Subject: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 5 and March 12, 2012
Special Study Session, March 5, 2012 – 6:30 p.m.
Tentative Discussion Item
1. Community Involvement in Environmental Initiatives – Administrative Services (45 minutes)
As a follow-up to the Council’s Workshop in January staff proposes a discussion on ways in
which the community can be a more active participant on the environment in the community.
As requested by the Council at the Workshop staff will provide background information on
the process used to create the Police Advisory Commission and how that might relate to this
topic.
Study Session, March 12, 2012 – 6:30 p.m.
Tentative Discussion Items
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
2. Redistricting Options – Administrative Services (60 minutes)
Staff will present redistricting options to Council for discussion of ward boundary
adjustments required to meet equal size in population and establishment of polling precincts
in preparation for the public hearing scheduled for March 19, 2012.
3. Stormwater Follow-Up – Public Works (45 minutes)
Discuss the state of water quality of water bodies in the City, from a functional perspective,
to include possible improvement projects and treatment options. This is a follow-up from
previous discussions,
4. Solid Waste Program Follow-Up – Public Works (45 minutes)
Discuss what being a leader in municipal solid waste management might look like.
5. Review of 2012 Assessment – Assessing (30 minutes)
Staff will review highlights of the 2012 Assessment, comment on Market activity and answer
any related questions. This presentation is in preparation for the annual Board of
Equalization process.
6. Planning Commission Annual Report – Community Development (5 minutes)
Council will discuss if they wish to meet with representatives of the Planning Commission at
a future meeting after reviewing the Planning Commission 2011 Annual Report.
7. 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
8. Vision Check-In Follow-Up
End of Meeting: 9:45 p.m.
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 2
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Project Update - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The purpose of this report and discussion is to update the Council on recent project development
activities, financial activities, and status of the public art process related to this project – Project
No. 2012-0100.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council have questions or concerns in continuing with the public art project being
proposed for this project?
Does the City Council have any specific questions on the overall project?
(As noted later in this report, the Council will need to make a decision on whether it wishes to
commit to undertaking this project by later this spring or summer.)
BACKGROUND:
History
The City’s Capital Improvement Program (C.I.P.) indentifies 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 MN/DOT and the City.
Project Schedule
In January 2012, staff made a formal request to the Metropolitan Council for a one year
extension to the federal funding sunset date. The extension request was made based on the need
for additional time for private utility coordination and relocation, right of way acquisition, as
well as the complex construction staging plan which includes time dependent soil correction
work and construction of a highway by-pass. The extension request was approved and a new
sunset date has been set for March 15, 2013.
In the last project update to City Council on December 12, 2011, staff presented two schedule
alternatives based on a one year time extension to the federal funding sunset date. One schedule
provides for an early start (April 1, 2013 construction start date) which allows for a full
construction season in the first year. The second schedule has a later start date (Early July, 2013
construction start date) which uses the full one year time extension request. At this time staff is
recommending that the early schedule (Attachment 1) be followed. Besides the advantage of the
full construction season in the first year, the early start allows the bidding schedule to be
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
conducted in January/February 2013 which is typically the time we see our most competitive
bids which should help minimize construction costs. This schedule also better addresses the
construction phasing complexities of the project and will minimize overall construction time and
impacts to our community and area property owners and businesses.
Phase 4 Activities (underway)
Council authorized the City’s consultant, SEH, Inc., to begin Phase 4 activities on April 4, 2011
with an expected cost of approximately $958,600. Phase 4 activities, described as Final Design
and Plan Preparation, include detailed engineering work needed to complete plans and
specifications to obtain final Mn/DOT project approvals and authorization for bidding. The
following is a list of tasks associated with this phase of the project:
• Project Management
• Public Involvement
• Survey Work
• Geotechnical Analysis
• Drainage Design
• Wetland Permitting
• Roadway Design
• Bridge Design
• Construction Staging
• Lighting
• Public Art
• Utility Coordination and Relocations
• Right of Way Acquisition
• Aesthetic Design and Landscape
Architecture
Final Design: Sixty percent construction plans were completed at the end of January 2012 and are
currently undergoing review by Mn/DOT and city staff. Sixty percent plans are essentially a nearly
complete set of detailed construction plans. Bridge plans and roadway plans are complete except for
incorporation of final details related to aesthetics, lighting, landscape and public art. Private utility
coordination/relocation work, permit application work and contract specification writing also
remains.
Other remaining work included in Phase 4 activities, but not yet authorized, is the Right of Way
acquisition activities and development of a Remedial Action Plan (RAP). A RAP is needed based
on the likelihood of disturbing contaminated soils during the construction of the project. A RAP
is essentially a procedure manual/plan which tells the contractor how they will handle and
dispose of any contaminated soils encountered during construction of the project. The cost for
SEH to prepare the RAP is estimated at $18,000. The RAP will require approval from the
MPCA. Staff intends to request Council approval (by contract amendment) for this needed work
at their March 19, 2012 meeting date.
Based on the proposed early start schedule, right of way acquisition work will need to begin
preferably in April 2012 but no later than June 2012. Right of way acquisition is a lengthy
process which needs to follow certain procedures required by State and Federal law. Right of
way can be acquired by two methods, direct purchase or eminent domain. Efforts will be made
first to acquire property through the direct purchase procedure. Direct purchase means the buyer
and seller have come to an agreement on the purchase price of the property usually based on the
estimated market value determined from appraisals. If the price of the property cannot be agreed
upon by the seller and buyer, eminent domain also known as condemnation will then be used.
The time estimated for right of way acquisition activities is six to nine months. The estimate of
costs for professional right of way acquisition services is $81,000. Staff will return to Council to
request approval of the right of way acquisition services later this spring.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
Private utility coordination/relocation efforts began in December 2011. It has been determined
that overhead power lines will need to be relocated in two areas, along the south side of Highway
7 and along the north side of Lake Street. Staff feels it is beneficial to underground portions of
the relocated lines to aid the construction staging plans as well as improve the aesthetics along
the Louisiana corridor just south of Highway 7. Xcel energy has indicated that any request for
undergrounding their lines will have to be at the city’s expense. The estimated cost for
undergrounding power lines is $200 per foot. Staff estimates that approximately 1,000 feet of
power line will need to be undergrounded.
Public Art
As discussions began regarding development of the Highway 7/Louisiana Interchange Project,
staff realized this would be a high profile area. In discussions with City Council, direction was
given to staff that they would like to see public art incorporated on the bridge.
George Hagemann and Terry Bently, residents of St. Louis Park and Friends of the Arts
members, have met with staff from Parks and Recreation and Public Works, engineers and
landscape architects from SEH, and with artists Andrea Mykelbust and Stan Sears to develop the
art project for the bridge.
Although several different areas to place public art were discussed, staff concentrated on the
bridge itself knowing that this would need to be part of the initial design. Staff would be unable
to add art to the form liner (sides of the bridge) later; it needs to be included in the initial design.
As identified in the accompanying proposal documents (Attachments 2, 3 & 4), the artists have
designed a series of patterns for poured-in-place artworks incorporated within the new Highway
7/Louisiana Avenue Interchange project. The artworks are designed for installation in multiple
locations within the bridge: along the bridge parapet railing, embankment ramps, and the center
pier cap which supports the bridge in the middle of the underpass.
Inspiration for the design of these poured-in-place artworks emerged from historical research in
the City of St Louis Park, and is drawn from the designs of the cast aluminum Bundt cake pans
made internationally famous by St. Louis Park-based Nordic Ware. Ten different patterns,
designed for incorporation within the existing Mn/DOT bridge design are identified in this
document: six which are used in combination to generate a continuous band of artwork along the
embankment and bridge railings, and four which are designed to wrap each end of the pier cap
and to act as stylized “capitals” for the four large piers which support the bridge at the center of
its span.
The ten patterns identified in the proposal are dimensioned as follows:
• For embankment and bridge railings: 6 patterns at approximately 96”l x 26”h x 2”d
• For pier caps: 3 patterns at approximately 72”l x 36”h x 2”d, and one at approximately
36”l x 36”h x 2”d
The cost estimate for design and development for the art on the bridge portion will be
approximately $65,000. The public art design process is being paid for out of the Development
Fund. The development of the patterns and molds will be paid for out of the project.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
Other Art Opportunities:
There are other art opportunities in this project. Art in the form of a sculpture or other art pieces
can be added to the roundabout areas. This could happen at any time in the future.
In addition to the art on the bridge, it is possible to add an art element to the sloped pavement
under the bridge or as a pattern in the pavers alongside the trail under the bridge. If Council
wishes staff to explore either of these options, please let us know at the meeting. All art in the
pavement or pavers would need to be decided soon so it can be incorporated into the final project
plans.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The following summarizes the project development phases and the costs contracted for with
SEH, Inc. to date:
Phase Contract Amount Cost to Date Status
1 & 2 $306,548.00 $296,420.77 Work Completed
3 $535,000.00 $561,231.81 Work Completed
4 $958,600.00 $718,319.33 75% Complete
Total $1,800,148.00 $1,575,971.91
Project Costs
Upon completion of the 60 percent plans, SEH prepared a new estimate of construction costs.
The new estimate, based on the detailed plan development, is $810,000 less than the previous
estimate. Presented below are the current project costs based on advanced design work.
Funding sources known at this time are also presented below:
Current Estimated Project Costs
Construction $18,090,000
Preliminary and Final Design Engineering $ 1,800,000
Construction Engineering (estimated consultant cost) $ 1,800,000
Right of Way $ 2,700,000
Total Costs $24,390,000
Funding Sources
Federal (STP) Funds $7,630,000
Mn/DOT Access Management Funds $1,000,000
Mn/DOT Cooperative Agreement Funds $ 594,000
Mn/DOT (Construction Eng’r Value) $1,800,000
City Funds (20% construction grant match – source TBD) $2,398,000
City Funds (Preliminary and Final Design Eng’r – source TBD) $1,800,000
City Funds (Right of Way – source TBD) $2,700,000
Total Committed Funds $17,922,000
Unfunded Amount $6,468,000
Funding Sources and Funding Gap
$7,630,000 in federal funds has been secured through the Met Council’s State Transportation
Program Urban Grant solicitation. $594,000 has been secured through the Mn/DOT Municipal
Agreement Program. Mn/DOT has also committed $1,000,000 in Access Management Funds
towards the project. At this time, it appears Mn/DOT is willing to provide contract
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2) Page 5
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
administration services for this project currently valued at approximately $1,800,000. As a part
of the grant agreement, the City is required to pay for Preliminary / Final Design Engineering
and Right of Way costs plus $2,398,000 required as a 20% match to the Federal construction
grant. The construction grant match costs as well as other construction related costs will only be
realized should the project be constructed. Thus minimum City costs are currently estimated to
be at least $6,898,000 – should the project be constructed – which leaves the $6,468,000
Unfunded Amount shown above.
As discussed at the Council Workshop in January, based on past experience and regional project
funding trends, the City should probably expect to pay about 50% of the total cost of this project
which would be approximately $12,195,000 (based on the new construction cost estimate).
Assuming the City would need to contribute this amount, that leaves a funding gap of
$1,171,000. This is the amount of outside dollars the City realistically needs to fully fund this
project. Any outside funds obtained beyond $1,171,000 or a reduction of actual project costs
would reduce the City’s overall financial contribution to the project to less than 50%.
Funding Opportunities
Current funding for Phases 1 through 4 is coming from HRA levy proceeds which have been
designated to pay for infrastructure improvements in redeveloping areas. Funding sources for
the City’s costs described above have not yet been determined. The following would be logical
sources to be considered:
• HRA levy proceeds
• Municipal State Aid Funds (gas tax monies)
• EDA funds
• General Obligation Bond Funds
At the Council Workshop in January staff presented a scenario where HRA Levy proceeds would
be used to fund the City’s total share of this project.
At some point in the next several months Council will need to decide whether to proceed
with or terminate this project. Steps have been and will continue to be taken to secure outside
funding needed for this project. For example:
The 2011 Legislature approved $10 million of state transportation bond funds in the Local Road
Improvement Program (LRIP). These funds are to be used to assist townships, cities and
counties in paying the costs of constructing or reconstructing local road projects with statewide
or regional significance. A grant application was submitted in February 2012 at the maximum
level of $500,000.
The Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Minnesota Department of Employment
and Economic Development (DEED) recently announced their solicitation for the 2012
Transportation Economic Development (TED) program. The total available funding for this
competitive grant program will be between $20 million and $30 million, depending on pending
legislative action in 2012. Mn/DOT has committed $20 million in Trunk Highway funds.
DEED is requesting an additional $10 million in bonding bill proceeds in the 2012 legislative
session. Our project was very competitive in the 2011 TED grant solicitation falling just behind
the top three awarded metro projects. Our 2011 TED grant application sought to fill our entire
$10 million unfunded amount at that time. For the 2012 grant solicitation, staff working with its
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2) Page 6
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
consultant, SEH, will likely choose a grant amount less than the current $6,468,000 unfunded
amount identified above to ensure our grant request is very competitive.
Finally, a grant application was submitted to the Metropolitan Council on February 15 that
requested $1.9 million in funds for this project to help pay for land acquisition, trail construction,
and geotechnical costs
Summary and Next Steps
In summary, final plans will be completed within the next two months and include public art
components. To continue project development activities, staff needs final direction from Council
on public art components for the project. As noted earlier in this report, the Council will need to
make a decision by this spring or summer on whether it wishes to commit to this project. It is
expected that we should know about the success of our grant applications by that time. Setting
aside funding issues, the following schedule provides for a bid opening during February of 2013:
RAP Completion May 2012
Right of Way Acquisition May – Dec 2012
Completion of Final Plans June 2012
Utility Relocations June 2012 – May 2013
Mn/DOT Approval of Plans, Specifications, Estimate Oct 2012
FHWA Authorizes Project Dec 2012
Advertise for Bids Jan 2013
Bid Opening Feb 2013
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The following Strategic Directions and focus areas have been identified by Council.
St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community.
Focus will be on:
• Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding
sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and
SWLRT.
St. Louis Park is committed to promoting and integrating arts, culture and
community aesthetics in all city initiatives, including implementation where
appropriate.
Attachments: Attachment 1 – Schedule (early start)
Attachment 2 – Public Art Concept Sketch, Art Inspiration Elements and
Example of Bridge Form Liner Work (Edgerton Bridge over I-694)
Attachment 3 – Art Project Rendering – Entrance Ramp View
Attachment 4 – Art Project Rendering – Sidewalk View
Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager
Cindy S. Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
DRAFT Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue Interchange
Design and Right of Way Schedule - EARLY START
Revised December 2011
Printed 11/30/2011
Assumes one year extension for Federal funds to March 31, 2013.
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul
FONSI (EA approved)
Final Design (April 1 Start)
60% plans
Agency Review 60% Plans
Final plans
Agency Review Final Plans
Public Art Process/Aesthetic Design
Utility Coordination
Remedial Action Plan (RAP)
Agency Review of RAP
Special Provisions
Engineer's estimate
State Aid Engineer approval of plans
FHWA Authorization
Utility relocation certificate
Permit applications submitted
R/W Acquisition
R/W identification
Appraisals
Offers/Negotiation/Title & Possession
Condemnation initiated
Right of Way Certificate 1
Private Utility Relocation
Advertise for bids
Open bids (February 2013)
Award contract
Begin construction (April 1, 2013)
2012 2013
S:\PT\S\Stlou\116227\2-mgmt\Design Schedule (Early) Revised Dec 2011.xlsx
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Page 7
Conceptual design for poured-in-place
bridge artworks at the T.H. 7/
Louisiana Avenue interchange project
Andrea Myklebust & Stanton Sears
1.2012
Above: Poured-in-place artworks have a maximum total depth of 2”, and are
set within the concrete railing on the outside of the bridge. VIsual imagery in
the artwork is drawn from abstracted forms of cast aluminum cake pans.
Far left: Similar poured-in-place artworks designed by the artists for the city
of Vadnais Heights, MN (maximum depth of the sculptural relief in this project
was 1”). Near left: A full scale sample of concrete pattern relief carving in
wood, with a maximum depth of 2”.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Page 8
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Page 9
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Project Update - Hwy 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Page 10
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 3
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
To review planned improvements to the sidewalk, trail, and bikeway systems and to discuss
related policy issues so a financing plan (construction and maintenance) and public involvement
process can be finalized to allow for the construction of the desired improvements.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
To allow for the finalization of financing and public involvement plans, staff seeks Council
direction on the following:
1. Does Council want to continue with the two sidewalk systems that currently exist in the
city – community walks and neighborhood walks?
BACKGROUND:
History - At the June 6, 2011 Study Session Council discussed implementing the recently
developed pedestrian and bicycle system plan. The results of Vision St. Louis Park and recent
community surveys have shown strong support for expanding the City’s system of sidewalk and
trails. In addition, Council also discussed the current system of community and neighborhood
sidewalks. As a result of the discussion Council requested staff to:
1. Prepare a capital improvement program (CIP) utilizing a proactive, high priority
approach to implement the recently developed pedestrian and bicycle improvement plan
along with resources needed to implement this improvement program
2. Provide information used in the past to identify the community vs. neighborhood
sidewalk systems
3. Provide information related to taking over maintenance responsibility of the
neighborhood sidewalk system
At the September 12, 2011 Study Session staff presented a detailed draft CIP which utilized a
proactive, high priority approach to build all the trails, community sidewalks, on-street bikeways,
and bridges identified in the Active Living, Sidewalks and Trail Plan within 10 years. Higher
priority projects were to be implemented earlier in the CIP, unless there were efficiencies gained
by timing construction with other capital improvements planned in the area. All improvement
types (sidewalks, trails, bikeways, and pedestrian bridges) were treated more or less equally in
terms of priority. Public Works roughly estimated the total costs to build all the improvements
would be in the $15 - $20 million dollar range.
Various departments are planned to have a role in implementing this plan; Public Works would
lead in constructing the proposed improvements, Community Development would have a
supporting role in the public involvement process, and Parks and Recreation would refurbish
existing trails (to the extent they are included in the plan).
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review
Public Works estimated the additional annual costs to maintain the proposed expanded system as
follows (this is based on the current community and neighborhood sidewalk system):
1. Sidewalks (14.2 additional miles) could increase annual maintenance costs (repairs and
snow removal) approximately $34,000 in present day costs (current annual maintenance
costs are approximately $160,000)
2. Trails (3 additional miles) could increase annual maintenance costs (repairs and snow
removal) approximately $9,000 in present day costs (current annual maintenance costs
are approximately $100,000)
3. On-street Bikeways (27 additional miles) could increase annual maintenance costs
(striping and signing) approximately $25,000 in present day costs (current annual
maintenance costs are approximately $500)
It was felt that at least one and possibly two additional Public Service Workers would need to be
added to provide the additional maintenance associated with these improvements.
Finally, staff provided Council with background information on the existing systems. St. Louis
Park currently has 110.6 miles of sidewalks, 43.1 miles of trails, and 5 miles of on-street
bikeways. Since 1975 there have been four major sidewalk planning efforts which have
culminated in the two sidewalk systems and policies we have today. The Comprehensive Plan
divides sidewalks into two categories: community sidewalks and neighborhood sidewalks. There
are an estimated 47.9 miles of community sidewalks and 62.7 miles of neighborhood sidewalks
(see Exhibit A: Sidewalk Systems – 2012).
Community Sidewalks – these are walks described as being of general public interest that create
a network to major points of interest such as transit, schools, shopping areas, and parks. Most of
these walks are located along collector and arterial roadways carrying many thousands of
vehicles per day. Installation and maintenance of these sidewalks are a City responsibility at
City cost. Snow removal on these walks is the responsibility of the City to a standard that meets
City Ordinance requirements. Approximately 47.9 miles of sidewalk (43%) are designated as
community sidewalks.
Neighborhood Sidewalks – these are walks described as being more of localized public interest
and use. They provide accessibility for pedestrians within the immediate area. Most of the
neighborhood sidewalk network was built by developers when single-family home subdivisions
were built; additional neighborhood sidewalks were built by the City and assessed to the
neighboring property owners. Since at least 1976, City ordinances have required all land
subdivisions and all commercial and multiple family residential developments to install
sidewalks along streets as part of the approval process. By ordinance, repairs to these sidewalks
are the responsibility of the adjacent property owner at their cost. However, in recent years, the
City has undertaken the responsibility of inspecting and repairing these sidewalks at City cost.
This was done as a convenience to property owners. Snow removal on these walks is the
responsibility of the adjacent property owner to a standard that meets City Ordinance
requirements. Approximately 62.7 miles of sidewalk (57%) are designated as neighborhood
walks.
Maintenance Costs - community sidewalk maintenance costs average about $75,000 / yr for
snow removal (45.7 miles) and $85,000 / yr for repairs (108.4 miles). Community walks are a
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review
minimum of 5 feet wide – most are 6 feet or more in width. Taking over responsibility for
Neighborhood Sidewalks would mainly consist of providing snow removal for an additional 50
miles of 5’ wide sidewalk and 10.5 miles of sidewalk that are less than 5’ wide. To provide
snow removal for these additional 60.5 miles of walks would require adding 6 new routes (6 new
workers and 6 new machines) costing about $465,000 / yr.
Staff’s Take on Community vs. Neighborhood Sidewalks
From staff’s vantage point the long standing community/neighborhood sidewalk system works
well from a construction, maintenance and snow removal perspective. Staff does have concerns
about the practical reality of providing snow removal for all neighborhood sidewalks,
particularly those that are less than 5 feet wide, and meet the expectations of the Council and
community in terms of quality and timeliness.
On a related matter, as the Council will note on the attachments, a significant amount of
neighborhood sidewalks are proposed to be added to fill gaps and make connections. Current
policy dictates that the adjacent property owner is responsible for the cost of constructing the
sidewalks and for snow removal. In order to achieve the greatest success possible in building
these neighborhood sidewalks the Council may wish to consider a policy change that would
provide for the City paying for the constructing these neighborhood walks with snow removal
still being the responsibility of the property owner.
Recent Events
Much progress has been made since September and based on the Active Living, Sidewalks and
Trail Plan and the draft 10 year CIP, staff has developed maps of the proposed sidewalk system
(see Exhibit B: Sidewalks), trail system (see Exhibit C: Trails), and biking system (see Exhibit
D: Bikeways and Bikelanes). These maps show both the existing facilities and proposed
improvements. In addition, staff has also developed a “pedestrian system” map showing the
future planned (both existing and proposed) sidewalks and trails (see Exhibit E: Sidewalks and
Trails) as well as a “biking system” map showing the future planned (both existing and
proposed) trails and bikeways (see Exhibit F: Trails and Bikeways). Finally, these maps can be
easily and quickly revised to show the proposed construction schedule of these various
improvements.
Next Steps
In order to finalize a financing plan and public involvement process staff needs to know if
Council wants to continue with the two sidewalk system that currently exists in the city –
community walks and neighborhood walks. Upon receiving this direction staff will take the next
step of developing and bringing back more specific plans for implementation.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None at this time. Council direction is needed to develop a financing plan for these proposed
improvements.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The following Strategic Direction and focus areas have been identified by Council.
St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community.
Focus will be on:
• Developing an expanded and organized network of sidewalks and trails.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3) Page 4
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review
Attachments: Exhibit A: Sidewalk Systems – 2012
Exhibit B: Sidewalks
Exhibit C: Trails
Exhibit D: Bikeways and Bikelanes
Exhibit E: Sidewalks and Trails
Exhibit F: Trails and Bikeways
Prepared by: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Scott Brink, City Engineer
Cindy Walsh, Parks and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
I-394
HWY 7HIGHWAY 169CEDAR LA
K
E
R
D
MINNETONKA BLVD
29TH ST WLOUISIANA AVE SWALKER ST LAKE ST W
TEXAS AVE S28TH ST W
31ST ST W
EXCEL
SI
O
R
B
L
V
DDAKOTA AVE S35TH ST W IDAHO AVE SWAY
Z
A
T
A
B
L
V
D
OXFOR
D
S
TFLAG AVE SLOUISIANA AVE S (E)FRANCE AVE SFORD RDLOUISIANA AVE S (W)FLORIDA AVE S40TH ST WSUMTER AVE S27TH ST W
GEORGIA AVE SWOODDA
L
E
A
V
EHIGHWAY 100RHODE ISLAND AVE SYOSEMITE AVE SLI
B
R
A
R
Y
L
A
SERVICE DR
H
W
Y
3
9
4
S
33RD ST W JERSEY AVE SHAMPSHIRE AVE S39TH ST W
32ND ST W COLORADO AVE SEDGEWOOD AVE SALABAMA AVE SZARTHAN AVE S36TH ST W
UTICA AVE SKENTUCKY AVE SOTTAWA AVE S26TH ST W
CO. Rd. 25
42ND ST WWEBSTER AVE SGORHAM AVE
25TH ST W
14TH ST W
38TH ST WCAMBRIDGE ST
SERVIC
E
D
R
H
W
Y
7
S
PARK GL
E
N
R
D
34TH ST W RALEIGH AVE SBELT LINE BLVDOREGON AVE SBRUNSWICK AVE SJOPPA AVE SSERVICE DR HWY 7 NHUNTINGTON AVE SVERNON AVE SVIRGINIA CIR N
GLENHURST AVEDIVISION ST
QUENTIN AVE S25 1/2 ST W
AQUILA LALYNN AVE SCLUB RD
SHELARD PKWY
16TH ST W
TOLEDO AVE SFOR
E
S
T
R
D
EDGEB
R
O
O
K
D
R SERVICE DR HWY 100ENEVADA AVE SPENNSYLVANIA AVEMELROSE AVE S23RD ST W
18
T
H
S
T
W
36 1/2 ST W
13TH LA
22ND ST W
INGLEWOOD AVE S37TH ST W XENWOOD AVE SUTAH AVE S24TH ST
W MARYLAND AVE SSALEM AVE SWESTWOOD HILLS DRBASSWOOD RD
MACKEY AVENATCHEZ AVE SBLACKSTONE AVE SXYLON AVE SUTAH DRHospital service drivePOWELL RD
VICTORIA WAY
GAMBLE DR
DART AVEZAR'I'HAN AVE SQUEBEC AVE SAQUILA AVE SA
Q
U
I
L
A
A
V
E
S
(
W
)
36TH ST W (S)KILMER AVEJORDAN AVE STAFT AVEPRINCETON AVE SCAVELL AVE SM
O
N
I
T
O
R
S
T RIDGE DRFORD LA
MEADOWBROOK LAHILLSBORO AVE SGENERAL MILLS BLVDPHILLIPS PKWYGLEN PLDECATUR AVE S42 1/2 ST WBLACKSTONE AVE SMINNETONKA
B
L
V
D
28TH S
T
W
FORD R
D
HILLSBORO AVE SNEVADA AVE S36TH ST WUTAH AVE SIDAHO AVE SJORDAN AVE S26TH ST W
24TH ST W
25 1/2 ST W
FRANCE AVE SUTICA AVE SCOLORADO AVE S26TH ST W ALABAMA AVE S33RD ST W
34TH ST W
WAYZATA BLVD
28TH S
T
W
AQUILA AVE S34TH ST W ALABAMA AVE SYOSEMITE AVE S33RD ST W
35TH ST W
25TH ST W IDAHO AVE S28TH ST W
BRUNSWICK AVE SALABAMA AVE S16TH ST
W
26TH ST W
VERNON AVE SQUENTIN AVE SSUMTER AVE SCE
D
A
R
L
A
K
E
R
D
SALEM AVE S35TH ST W
ZARTHAN AVE STOLEDO AVE S36TH ST W
WEBSTER AVE SUTICA AVE SSidewalk Systems - 2012
Legend
Community Sidewalks City Maintained 45.7 miles/241,531 feet
Community Sidewalks SSD Maintained 2.2 miles/11,818 feet
Neighborhood Sidewalks Resident Maintained 60.5 miles/319,680 feet
Neighborhood Sidewalks Developer Maintained 2.2 miles/11,508 feet
2/22/2011tw
±
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3)
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review Page 5
Sidewalks
Legend
Existing Sidewalks
Future Sidewalks
.
2-22-2012tw
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3)
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review Page 6
Trails
Legend
Existing Trails
Future Trails
Future Bridges
.
2-23-2012tw
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3)
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review Page 7
Bikeways and Bikelanes .
1-30-2012
Legend
Future Bikeways
Exisiting Bikeway
Continuation in adjacent City
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3)
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review Page 8
Sidewalks and Trails
Legend
Trails
Sidewalks
.
2-23-2012tw
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3)
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review Page 9
Trails and Bikeways .
2-23-2012tw
Legend
Bikeways
Trails
Continuation in adjacent City
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 3)
Subject: Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan and Policy Review Page 10
Meeting Date: February 27 2012
Agenda Item #: 4
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item
Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff desires direction as to the reappointment/appointment of three persons to serve as
representatives of the City of St. Louis Park on the CAC.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Who does the City Council wish to represent the City on the SWLRT CAC?
BACKGROUND:
In 2007 the City Council appointed three individuals who agreed to serve on the Southwest
Transitway Citizen’s Advisory Committee: Bill James, Bob Tift, and Heather Klein. Lisa Miller
has also been a participant on the CAC. The purpose of the CAC at that time was to be “to provide
an open forum for discussion of community issues, provide a vehicle for educating the community
on the potential benefits/impacts and potential mitigation measures associated with LRT
implementation, and to provide guidance to the Southwest Transitway Policy Advisory Committee
(PAC).”
Both Bob Tift and Bill James were members of the Transportation Action Team during the Vision
process, and Heather Klein was a resident in the Birchwood neighborhood. Bob Tift lives south of
the SWLRT corridor at 3800 Brunswick Avenue in the Elmwood Neighborhood and Bill James
lives north of the corridor at 3224 Florida Avenue in the Lenox neighborhood. Lisa Miller lives at
3018 Alabama in the Sorenson neighborhood.
The CAC began meeting in July of 2007 and has continued to meet up until the present. In order
to continue providing opportunities for community participation, the Metropolitan Council and
Hennepin County are expanding the membership and role of the Community Advisory Committee
(CAC). The CAC will meet monthly to advise the Metropolitan Council project office staff,
responsible for engineering of the light rail line, as well as the Hennepin County Community
Works project, which will integrate land use planning and economic development along the line.
This new, integrated model will be supported by a recent federal Sustainable Communities grant
which will help advance multimodal transportation choices, promote affordable housing with
access to jobs, and increase environmental preservation and energy efficiency. See the attached
charter for more information on the purpose, roles and responsibilities of the Southwest
Community Advisory Committee (CAC).
In a letter from the Metropolitan Council/Hennepin County the Mayor has been asked to either
confirm that the City wishes to continue with our current representation or that he would like to
appoint new representation by completing the attached form by March 5, 2012. Based on the fact
that there will be three SWLRT stations in SLP, the Met Council and Hennepin County are asking
the City to appoint three representatives to the CAC. Thus far attempts to contact Lisa Miller to
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Subject: Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)
determine her interest in the CAC have been unsuccessful. Heather Klein no longer lives in St.
Louis Park. Both Bill James and Bob Tift have expressed their desire to continue serving on the
CAC. Assuming the Council decides to reconfirm their appointment, one position remains to be
filled. The City may also appoint alternates if it so chooses.
Several people have stepped forward with an interest in serving on the CAC. Specifically these
residents have expressed an interest.
1. Mathew Flory – 3244 Edgewood, president of the Lenox Neighborhood
2. Kathryn Kottke – 2712 Brunswick Ave, Bronx Park neighborhood
3. Claudia Johnson-Madison – 3931 Joppa Avenue, president of the Minikahda Vista
neighborhood
It is important to note that many organizations, including Safety in the Park, have been invited
directly by the Met Council and Hennepin County to provide a representative to the CAC
regardless of who the cities ask to serve on the CAC. Over 25 independent groups like Safety in
the Park have received invitations to participate in the CAC. A list of the groups invited is
attached.
A Business Advisory Committee (BAC) is also being created specifically for representatives of
the businesses and commercial/industrial property owners along the SWLRT corridor. More to
come on the specifics of that committee.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Nomination Form
CAC Charter
Letter to Mayor Jacobs
Organizations Invited to be Represented on SWLRT CAC
Prepared by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Draft 1/20/12
Advisory Committee New Member Form
Information about the Organization: Provide the following information about your organization:
Organization Name:
President/ Chair Name:
Street Address:
City, State and Zip:
Phone: ( ) - E-mail:
Purpose or Mission:
Briefly describe your organization. Be sure to include number of members, governance
structure and tax status (e.g. non-profit or 501(c)3).
Information about the Appointee: Provide the following information about the person you are
recommending to serve on the committee.
Name:
Street Address:
City, State and Zip:
Phone: ( ) - E-mail:
Authorization: The executive director, chair, president or equivalent authorizes the above
named person to represent the organization.
Signature Position/Title:
Mail or email this completed form to:
Attn: SWLRT Advisory Committee
Metropolitan Council
Fairview Avenue North, Suite 200
St. Paul, MN 55104
If you have questions or would like to request an electronic copy of the form, please contact Robin
Caufman at robin.caufman@metc.state.mn.us or (651) 602-1457.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Page 3
Charter of the Southwest LRT
Community Advisory Committee (CAC)
SCOPE
The Southwest LRT Community Advisory Committee (CAC) was established in 2007 to provide guidance
on community issues during the Alternatives Analysis (AA) and Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS) phases of Southwest LRT project development. Members were appointed by the partner cities
and neighborhood organizations to provide representation for the station areas. In 2012, the purpose,
role and composition of the CAC is being expanded to provide for broader community involvement on the
Southwest LRT project as it progresses through the Preliminary Engineering (PE)/Final EIS phases and
Hennepin County’s Community Works planning efforts to maximize and integrate economic development
along the Southwest LRT line.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the CAC is to serve as a voice for the community and advise the Southwest LRT Corridor
Management Committee and the Southwest LRT Community Works Steering Committee during the
planning and implementation phases of the light rail line and beyond:
1. Advise on communications and outreach strategies for the Southwest LRT project’s Draft
Environmental Impact Statement, Preliminary Engineering, and the Final Environmental Impact
Statement as well as the Southwest LRT Community Works’ land use/economic development
initiatives.
2. Provide input on station location, design, and construction to reflect the needs of the community,
including residents, visitors, businesses, transit riders, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
3. Provide input on station area (1/2 mile radius of station location) vision and character for
development from a community perspective.
4. Identify environmental concerns and impacts related to construction and operation of the light rail
line.
5. Identify potential issues and review strategies to mitigate the impacts of construction on
residences and businesses.
6. Review and comment on major initiatives and actions of the Southwest LRT Community Works
program.
7. Serve as an information resource and liaison to the greater corridor community.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The Southwest CAC has reporting responsibilities to both the Southwest LRT Management Committee
and the Southwest LRT Community Works Steering Committee.
In addition, the CAC will have a representative from their membership serving as member of the
Southwest LRT Management Committee and the Southwest LRT Community Works Steering
Committee.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Page 4
Draft 1/26/12
RESPONSIBILITIES
Each member of the Southwest CAC agrees to:
1. Attend a majority of CAC meetings (alternates will be allowed to participate in the committee
discussions if CAC staff are notified prior to the meeting.)
2. Be a voice to advance the broader interests of the local community or interest they represent.
3. Report to the entity represented on the activities of the CAC as well as serve as a conduit of
information to the broader community.
4. Actively participate in discussions by sharing ideas and expertise.
5. Identify issues affecting communities impacted by both the LRT project development and
Community Works initiatives and assist in developing strategies for minimizing those impacts.
6. Provide feedback to the Southwest LRT Communication Steering Committee on the structure and
effectiveness of the communication and public involvement efforts.
7. Listen to and respect the viewpoints of others.
8. Accept the outcome of decisions, once they are made.
MEMBERSHIP
Members will be appointed for a one-year term and reconfirmation of membership will be requested on
an annual basis.
Membership is intended to represent the diverse interests and stakeholders along the Southwest LRT
line and will therefore include people from neighborhood groups, special interest groups, advocacy
groups, educational institutions and ethnic communities.
If an appointed member or alternate is no longer able to participate actively in the CAC, the organization
that appointed that person will be allowed to name a replacement.
MEETINGS
The CAC will meet monthly on the second Thursday of every month, from 6:00-7:30 P.M. Meetings will
be co-chaired by Jennifer Munt, Metropolitan Council District 3, and Jeanette Colby, Kenwood Isles Area
Association.
Agendas will be distributed to all members at least five business days before the meeting.
Special meetings, open houses, subcommittees and focus groups will be scheduled at regular intervals
and as needed.
To facilitate communication and a sharing of ideas and information, the CAC with meet jointly at least
twice each year with the Business Advisory Committee (BAC). This meeting will replace a regularly
scheduled CAC meeting.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Page 5
January 31, 2012
Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
City of St. Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Blvd
St Louis Park, MN 55416
RE: Southwest LRT Community Advisory Committee (CAC) Appointments
In September 2011, the Federal Transit Administration granted the Metropolitan Council
approval to start engineering the Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) project. This is a
significant milestone for the project that will provide the region with a fast, safe new
transportation choice and improve access to key destinations, including job centers in the
southwest suburbs, Minneapolis, St. Paul and the University of Minnesota.
All along, SW LRT has had robust community participation, including the formation of a
community advisory committee in 2007 charged with providing guidance during the early
planning stages for the Southwest LRT project. As the project moves into engineering and the
land uses around the stations change we want to continue and increase community participation
as the project moves forward. It is critically important to have an engaged community advisory
committee to provide guidance on a range of issues such as design, engineering, economic
development around station locations, environmental issues and potential mitigation measures.
We want to take this opportunity to confirm your member’s continued participation and ask you
to also identify an alternate, if you haven’t already done so.
In order to continue providing opportunities for community participation, the Metropolitan
Council and Hennepin County are expanding the membership and role of the Community
Advisory Committee (CAC). The CAC will meet monthly to advise the Metropolitan Council
project office staff, responsible for engineering of the light rail line, as well as the Hennepin
County Community Works project, which will integrate land use planning and economic
development along the line. This new, integrated model will be supported by a recent federal
Sustainable Communities grant which will help advance multimodal transportation choices,
promote affordable housing with access to jobs, and increase environmental preservation and
energy efficiency. See the attached charter for more information on the purpose, roles and
responsibilities of the Southwest Community Advisory Committee (CAC).
SW CAC members will play an important role in representing station areas and community
groups, identifying issues, discussing potential solutions and facilitating general public
awareness of the LRT project and related community development.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Page 6
Your organization is currently represented by (insert names of member(s)). Please either
confirm that you wish to continue with your current representation or that you would like to
appoint new representation by completing the attached form by March 5, 2012. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact Robin Caufman at 651-602-1457 or
robin.caufman@metc.state.mn.us or Katie Walker at 612-348-2190 or
Katie.walker@co.hennepin.mn.us.
Thank you for your continued participation on this important committee. We look forward to
working with the CAC as we develop the Southwest LRT line and support economic
development along the line.
Sincerely,
Susan Haigh, Chair Gail Dorfman, Commissioner
Metropolitan Council Hennepin County
Southwest LRT Management Committee Chair, Southwest LRT Community Works Steering
Committee
CC: Tom Harmening, City Administrator
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Page 7
Organizations Invited to ďe Represented on SWLRT CAC
Name Title Interest Email Oranization
Ron Biss TAAC Chair ADA, accessibility ronbiss@hotmail.com Transportation
Accessibility
Advisory
Committee
Donald Eyberg Architect Bike, trails deyberg@qwestoffice.net Bike Edina Task
Force
Joshua Houdek Environmental joshua.houdek@sierraclub.org Sierra Club
Northstar Chapter
Jim Erkel Environmental
Justice
jerkel@mncenter.org MN Center for
Environmental
Advocacy
Kandi Arries Resident Freight rail relocation ksarries@gmail.com Safety in the Park
Steve Cramer Executive
Director
Housing,
redevelopment, low
income
steve.cramer@ppl-inc.org Project for Pride In
Living
Amina Saleh Community
Organizer
Immigrant asaleh@fcsmn.org Family Partnership
Tania Haber Senior Pastor Low income,
housing, residents,
faith
t.haber@westwoodlutheran.org Westwood
Lutheran Church
Cathy Maes Director Low income,
residents, faith
blakeroad55343@gmail.com Intercongregation
Communities
Association (Blake
Rd Collaborative)
Beth Kodluboy Executive
Director
Low income,
residents, housing
bethk@homelinemn.org HOME Line
Jodi Nelson Executive
Director
Low income, under
represented
communities
jodi@micah.org MICAH
Lars Negstad Strategic
Campaigns
Coordinator
Low income, under
represented
communities
LNegstad@isaiahmn.org ISAIAH
Larry Blackstad Board Chair Parks, trails
Hennepin County
Board Appointee
Three River Parks
District
Anita Tabb Commissioner
District 4
Parks, trails atabb@minneapolisparks.org Minneapolis Park
and Rec. Board
Keith Prusing President Parks, trails,
environmental
info@cedarlakepark.org Cedar Lake Park
Association
Asad Aliweyd Executive
Director
Somali, immigrant,
business
New American
Academy
(Immigrant
Outreach) (Eden
Prairie-primarily)
Ted Duepner Depot Project
Coordinator
Youth tedduepner@gmail.com Depot Coffee Shop
Rich Wagner, Ph.D. President Students, transit
users
Dunwoody
Cecilia Cervantes,
Ph.D.
President Students, transit
users
cecilia.cervantes@hennepintech.edu Hennepin Tech,
Eden Prairie
Campus
Hilary Reeves Communications
Manager
Transit users hilaryr@tlcminnesota.org TLC
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Page 8
Jennifer Swanson resident, parks info@westcalhoun.org West Calhoun
Neighborhood
Ethan Fawley Transportation
Policy Director
complete streets,
active living
fawley@fresh-energy.org Fresh Energy
Ruth Kildow Senior
Ombudsman
seniors - Minneapolis ruth.kildow@minneapolismn.gov Senior Citizen
Advisory
Committee to the
Mayor and City
Council
Annette Sandler program
manager,
NORC
seniors - western
suburbs (SLP,
Hopkins,
Minnetonka)
asandler@jfcsmpls.org NORC - Jewish
Family & Children's
Service of Mpls
Stacy Unowsky Housing
Manager
housing sunowsky@hopkinsmn.com Dow Towers
Tom Fulton Executive
Director
Housing,
redevelopment, low
income
tfulton@fhfund.org Family Housing
Fund
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Appointments to the SWLRT Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) Page 9
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 5
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Council Policy Discussion – Recognition of Marriage Constitutional Amendment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No formal action requested at this time. Staff desires direction as to how to proceed with the
policy question put forward by Councilmember Spano.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to take a formal position on the “Recognition of Marriage”
Constitutional Amendment that will be on the ballot in November, 2012?
BACKGROUND:
Councilmember Spano has asked that the above policy question be presented to the Council to
determine if they wished to pursue action on this matter.
In 2011 the Minnesota State Legislature voted to include the following question on the election
ballot in November 2012: “Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a
union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?” If
passed the amendment would add a new Section 13 to the Minnesota Constitution stating: “Only
a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota.”
Attached is background information provided by Councilmember Spano from the City of Duluth
and Minneapolis on this topic.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Background Info City of Duluth & City of Minneapolis
Prepared & Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012, 2012 (Item No. 5)
Subject: Council Policy Discussion – Recognition of Marriage Constitutional Amendment Page 2
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012, 2012 (Item No. 5)
Subject: Council Policy Discussion – Recognition of Marriage Constitutional Amendment Page 3
Request for City Council Committee Action
from the Department of Intergovernmental Relations
Date: January 23, 2012
To: Council Vice President Robert Lilligren and Council Member Elizabeth Glidden
Referral to: Committee of the Whole; Intergovernmental Relations
Subject: 2012 Legislative Agenda
Recommendation: Approve an amendment to the 2012 Legislative Agenda by
adding as the last bullet under the Minneapolis Opposes section on Page 10, the
following language:
A proposed constitutional amendment entitled “Recognition of Marriage
Solely Between One Man and One Woman” and urges Minnesota citizens to
vote “No” on Tuesday, November 6, 2012.
Department Information
Prepared by: Gene Ranieri, Director, Intergovernmental Relations Department
Approved by: ___________________________________________________________
Presenters in Committee:
Supporting Information:
The 2011 Minnesota legislature voted to place the following question on the November 2012
election ballot: “Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to provide that only a union
of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota?”
If adopted the constitution would add a new section that reads; “Only a union of one man
and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota.”
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012, 2012 (Item No. 5)
Subject: Council Policy Discussion – Recognition of Marriage Constitutional Amendment Page 4
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 6
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Electronic Agenda.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No action requested.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does Council wish to have more detailed information provided on the use of “Tablet” devices in
order to facilitate an electronic vs. paper agenda process?
BACKGROUND:
Over the years staff and Council have discussed the use of a method to distribute the agenda and
other materials. A system has been in place to send agenda materials in an electronic format to
view on laptops. Several Councilmembers have used this process over the past years.
Next Opportunity – Use of Tablets: As technology advances, systems become more user-
friendly and affordable. We now have an opportunity to deliver the agenda on a smaller version
of equipment more commonly known as a tablet (e.g. iPad). At this meeting, staff will:
• Distribute tablets and provide an overview of functions related to the agenda.
• Have Councilmember Spano talk about how he uses his tablet to view the agenda.
• Discuss how tablets can be used for Council business and general activities.
Please note, Council members do NOT have to commit to use of tablets at this time. This is for
informational purposes, overview and practice.
NEXT STEPS:
1. After this meeting we want to send the tablets home with Council to give them time to
use the various functions and practice getting familiar with this tool.
2. We will have the March 5 agenda distributed as usual and also provide the information
on the tablets as a demonstration of use.
3. Training and staff assistance will be provided to those requesting this type of support.
4. Systems will be updated and we will determine who would like to receive materials in
this format.
Why provide this tool? As we become more familiar with the use of this type of equipment, we
will be able to distribute information in an electronic version and cut back on use of paper. This
is in line with Vision and environmental stewardship.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 6) Page 2
Subject: Electronic Agenda
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Funds for the technology are in the budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. We will increase
environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of City business (by saving a lot of
paper).
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Reviewed by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 7
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Not Applicable.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
BACKGROUND:
At every Study Session, verbal communications will take place between staff and Council for the
purpose of information sharing.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
Attachments: None
Prepared and Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 8
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Business Park Zoning District.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide background about the creation of the Business Park
Zoning District.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council have any questions or concerns regarding the new Business Park Zoning
District?
BACKGROUND:
The City Council adopted the 2030 Comprehensive Plan update in late 2009. As part of the
update, a new land use category of Business Park was created, and a number of parcels were
guided for future Business Park uses. The language from the Comprehensive Plan includes:
• Encouraging the creation of significant employment centers that accommodate a diverse
mix of office and light industrial uses and jobs.
• Application of the category for larger sites that can be redeveloped to provide:
§ A greater diversity of jobs
§ Higher development densities and jobs per acre
§ Higher quality site and building architectural design
§ Increased tax revenues for the community
• Appropriate uses may include office, office showroom- warehousing, research and
development services, light and high-tech electronic manufacturing and assembly, and
medical laboratories.
• Some retail and service uses may be allowed as supporting uses for the primary office
and light industrial uses of the employment center.
The Planning Commission has extensively reviewed draft language for a new Business Park
Zoning District that would bring the Zoning Ordinance into compliance with the direction set in
the Comprehensive Plan. Over five meetings, the draft Business Park ordinance was revised and
improved, and reviewed for its possible impacts and relation to other parts of the Zoning
Ordinance.
It is important to note that the adoption of the proposed new Business Park Zoning District does
not rezone any properties at this time. The new district would allow for a process in the future
for properties guided in the Comprehensive Plan for Business Park uses to obtain a rezoning to
the Business Park Zoning District. The adoption of the new ordinance simply brings the Zoning
Ordinance into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan by making possible a Business Park
district.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8) Page 2
Subject: Business Park Zoning District
Ordinance Details:
Development of the Business Park Zoning District began following adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan. The draft language was reviewed in late 2010 and early 2011 by the
Planning Commission. Issues were raised about the different uses that were to be allowed and
the performance standards for new buildings within the district. The district is something of a
hybrid between the Industrial Park and Office districts, as it would allow for some light assembly
and manufacturing, but has a greater emphasis on office and medical office types of uses. The
latest draft includes three new land use categories to be encouraged within the Business Park
Zoning District, including:
• Research and Development
• Light Assembly
• Low Impact Manufacturing and Processing
Summary Table – Business Park compared to Office and Industrial Park
Performance Standard / Use Business Park Office Industrial Park
Outdoor storage Prohibited Prohibited Accessory Use
Hours of operation Limited when
adjacent to
residential
No restrictions Permit needed for
overnight use when
adjacent to residential
Offices Permitted Permitted Conditional Use Permit
Banks / Medical Offices Permitted Permitted Not permitted
Restaurants / Retail / Service Permitted if < 25%
of building
Permitted Permitted only in a
Planned Unit Development
Light manufacturing Conditional Use
Permit
Not permitted Permitted
Heavy manufacturing Not permitted Not permitted Permitted
Warehouse / Storage Permitted if < 50%
of the building
Not permitted Permitted
Large item retail (i.e., furniture) Permitted if < 15%
of the building
Not permitted Permitted if < 15% of the
building
Planned Unit Developments Only jobs oriented Unrestricted Only retail / service
Setbacks when adjacent to
residential
30 feet or building
height
Half of building
height
35 feet or use of a formula
Maximum building height 110 feet 240 feet 75 feet
Maximum floor area ratio 2.0 1.5 0.5
The new Business Park Zoning District has been drafted with the intent that it could be applied
throughout the City. The performance standards and new land use categories of the district are
intended to help steer future redevelopment toward uses that meet the broad goals of the
Comprehensive Plan, including the important goal to increase the overall density of jobs within
Business Park areas. This may lead to changes that reduce the level of truck traffic and heavy
manufacturing, and increase the amount of office and light assembly taking place in the area.
The ordinance allows for greater building height than allowed in the Industrial Park district, but
lesser heights than in the Office district. It maintains sensitivities to adjacency to single family
residential areas of the City, something that is reflective of the entire Zoning Ordinance. The
draft ordinance is attached for review.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8) Page 3
Subject: Business Park Zoning District
It is important to note that some parcels guided for Business Park are close proximity to future
LRT stations. In such locations, it is possible that additional zoning changes may be necessary
prior to the commencement of LRT service. The Beltline Design Guidelines process, for
example, may result in some specific recommendations for zoning changes to help implement
the particular character of redevelopment called for in the guidelines. Further information about
station area planning and future zoning needs will emerge as planning studies for the stations are
completed.
Public Engagement:
The selection process for parcels to be designated as Business Park in the Comprehensive Plan
included several meetings with affected property and business owners. A total of 55 parcels
were guided for future Business Park uses, as depicted on the attached maps.
Staff has held several meetings with individual property owners in the area to discuss and obtain
input about the proposed Business Park Zoning District regulations. In addition, a large group
meeting to discuss the draft ordinance was held on June 22nd, 2011. All property owners and
businesses guided for Business Park in the Comprehensive Plan were invited to the meeting, and
a total of eight people attended and provided input into the draft ordinance. Business and
property owners were also notified directly of the Planning Commission public hearing for
consideration of the ordinance. There were no business or property owners present at the
Planning Commission public hearing. Property owners will be able to request rezoning after the
ordinance is in place.
The Planning Commission, after further discussing the draft ordinance, recommended approval.
Future Actions:
The draft ordinance is currently scheduled for a first reading at the City Council on March 19th.
If adopted, there would be information provided to owners of property designated in the
Comprehensive Plan as Business Park. However, as stated, no rezoning of individual properties
is included as part of the current ordinance. If the ordinance is adopted, Staff will begin a
process for consideration of rezoning properties within those areas designated as Business Park
in the Comprehensive Plan. Any rezoning process will include collaboration with property
owners, businesses, and residents of the affected areas.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not directly applicable.
Attachments: Business Park Zoning District – Proposed Text
2030 Comprehensive Plan Land – Business Park (Land Use Chapter)
2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Map – Excerpts
Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Planner
Reviewed by: Meg J. McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
ARTICLE IV. ZONING DISTRICTS § 36-231
DIVISION 7. BUSINESS PARK DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Sec. 36-231. Purpose of division.
The provisions of this division deal with business park uses of land and structures in the city.
Sec. 36-232. Business Park (BP) district restrictions and performance standards.
No structure or premises within any BP district shall be used for any use allowed as permitted,
permitted with conditions, Conditional Use Permit, or Planned Unit Development, unless it complies
with the following regulations:
1. All activities conducted in a BP district shall be conducted wholly within an enclosed
structure except as specifically permitted elsewhere in this chapter.
2. Outdoor storage shall be prohibited in the BP district.
3. All delivery service entrances to a building in the BP district shall be from a public
alley, service alley, or off-street parking lot.
4. No vehicular curb-cuts shall be permitted within a distance of 50 feet from any
intersection, unless the City Engineer determines that such a curb-cut is necessary and
will be safe for pedestrians or bicyclists using nearby trails, sidewalks, or roadways.
5. Structures shall not generate significant traffic on local residential streets. Where
possible, structures shall be accessed from a roadway identified in the Comprehensive
Plan as a collector or arterial.
6. Off-street parking shall not be located between any buildings and an adjacent
residential property line.
7. The Zoning Administrator shall review plans for all loading docks, which to the
greatest extent possible should be screened from the right-of-way and should not be
located between the principal building and any adjacent residential property line.
8. Truck activity routes shall be reviewed to account for the expected level of pedestrian
traffic. Such routes should be designed to minimize impacts to pedestrian and bicycle
routes and safety issues during periods of truck activity.
9. The processes and equipment used to conduct the business of a primary use on any
site in the BP district shall meet the following requirements:
a. Vibration. Any vibration discernible beyond the property line to the human
sense of feeling for three minutes or more duration (cumulative) in any one
hour and any vibration producing a particle velocity of more than 0.035
inch per second are prohibited.
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 4
b. Glare or heat. Any operation producing intense glare or heat shall be
performed within an enclosure so as not to be perceptible at the property
line.
c. Noise. Noise levels both inside and outside of buildings must meet federal,
state and local requirements which may be amended from time to time.
d. Air pollution. All emissions shall meet federal, state and local requirements
which may be amended from time to time.
10. Uses located upon parcels located adjacent to a parcel zoned, guided or used for
residential purposes may operate only between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM.
The Zoning Administrator may, in writing, waive this performance standard if it can
be demonstrated that overnight operations will have no negative effects on adjacent
properties.
Sec. 36-233. BP business park district.
(a) Purpose / effect. The purposes of the BP business park district are to:
1. Encourage the creation of significant employment centers that accommodate a diverse
mix of office and light industrial uses and jobs.
2. Allow for redevelopment and intensification of sites to provide a greater diversity of
employment opportunities within the community, increase development densities and
jobs per acre, and improve overall site aesthetics and building design.
3. Shape redevelopment to meet the requirements of the market to provide efficient
building types with sufficient access, high clear heights, truck courts, and aesthetically
pleasing building exteriors and sites.
4. Encourage and support the appropriate evolution and expansion of individual
businesses to improve the climate for business growth and foster conditions favorable
to increasing the amount of finished square footage and the number of jobs per acre in
BP areas.
5. Protect planned Business Park areas from encroachment from non-affiliated or
incompatible uses, while enhancing their compatibility with nearby residential areas.
6. Promote and support the redevelopment or rehabilitation of physically and
economically obsolete or underutilized buildings and sites.
7. Promote business park developments that utilize efficient land use and building
designs, including multi-story buildings, multi-tenant buildings, and structured
parking.
8. Encourage and support new business park developments that are designed as
employment centers that are integrated in to the community with strong connections
to adjacent public streets and spaces, natural features, transit, and other community
amenities.
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 5
9. Encourage shared parking between uses, including flexible parking arrangements to
allow for multi-modal use of available transit and regional trail facilities.
10. Regulate the trade and commerce of the community.
11. Provide opportunities for multi-modal activity on streets and an improved, desirable
environment for pedestrians and other non-motorized modes of transportation.
(b) Permitted uses. The following uses with a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 1.0 are permitted
in the BP district:
1. Banks.
2. Business / trade school.
3. College / University.
4. Libraries.
5. Medical and dental office or laboratory.
6. Museums/art galleries.
7. Offices.
8. Parks and open spaces.
9. Parks and recreation.
10. Police and fire stations.
11. Research and Development.
12. Transit stations.
(c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in any BP district may be used for one
or more of the following uses if it has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 1.0 and complies with
the performance standards as stated in Section 36-232 and the conditions stated below:
1. Catering. The conditions are as follows:
a. Any exhaust system venting to the outdoors shall be located away from
residential areas.
b. Outside storage of catering vehicles or associated equipment is prohibited.
2. Adult day care. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use must have a minimum of 150 square feet of outdoor area per adult
under care dedicated to outdoor activity or be within ¼ mile of a city park.
3. Communication antennas. The conditions are as follows:
a. Antennas must be attached to an existing structure.
b. Antennas shall be subject to all provisions of Section 36-368,
“Communication Towers and Antennas”.
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 6
4. Educational. Educational uses for students grades K-12, subject to conditions as
follows:
a. The use must have a minimum of 40 square feet of outdoor area per student
dedicated to outdoor student activity or be within ¼ mile of a city park.
b. The use may not exceed 25% of the gross floor area of a single story building
or 50% of the ground floor in a multi-story building.
5. Group day care/nursery schools. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use must have a minimum of 40 square feet of outdoor area per pupil
dedicated to outdoor activity or be within ¼ mile of a city park.
b. The use may not exceed 25% of the gross floor area of a single story building
or 50% of the ground floor in a multi-story building.
c. Provision shall be made for drop-off and pick-up of children or students.
6. Indoor entertainmentThe conditions are as follows:
a. The use may not exceed 10% of the gross floor area of a multi-use building.
b. The use must be so located as to be visible and easily accessible to pedestrians
from the public right-of-way.
7. Public Tervice Ttructures. The conditions are as follows:
a. All structures shall be located a minimum of ten feet from any parcel that is
zoned residential.
b. All service drives shall be paved.
8. Restaurants,Setail or Tervice. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use may not exceed of 25% of the gross floor area of a multi-use building
or 50% of the ground floor area in a multi-story building, whichever is
greater.
b. The use must be so located as to be visible and easily accessible to pedestrians
from the public right-of-way.
9. Studios. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use may not exceed 25% of the gross floor area of a multi-use building.
(d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in a BP district shall be
used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with all
standards of the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 36, and shall only be permitted if findings are
produced indicating that there are no adverse impacts upon the health, safety and welfare of the
community.
1. Uses allowed as “Permitted” or “Permitted with Conditions” in the BP district with a
floor area ratio (FAR) equal to or greater than 1.0.
2. Light Assembly or Low Impact Manufacturing and Processing.
3. More than one principal building.
a. Uses where more than one principal building is located on a single lot.
4. Parking ramps.
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 7
a. Parking ramps constructed as the principal use on a site shall meet the
dimensional standards of this Section.
b. Parking ramps shall meet or exceed the architectural design standards for
principal buildings found in Section 36-366.
c. A minimum of 40% of the street level frontage of a parking ramp located
adjacent to a street designated as a “Collector” or higher in the
Comprehensive Plan shall be dedicated to non-parking uses. This
requirement may be adjusted at the direction of the Planning Commission
based on specific reasons related to site design.
d. Parking ramps shall be designed so that vehicles are not visible from the
sidewalk and the only openings at street level are those to accommodate
vehicle ingress and egress.
e. Snow removal areas shall not be located in the front yard or side yard
abutting a street.
(e) Uses permitted by PUD. A structure or land in a BP district may be dedicated to non-
residential uses meeting the purpose and effect of the Zoning District through the PUD process, if
such uses are primarily dedicated to increasing employment density and furthering the goals of the
Comprehensive Plan. Such uses shall comply with the requirements of the performance standards
in Section 36-232. Provisions for the PUD and modifications to dimensional standards and
densities are provided under section 36-367.
(f) Accessory uses. Within any BP district, the following shall be permitted accessory uses,
subject to any required conditions:
1. Food service. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use must be located on the ground floor.
b. The use may not exceed 25% of the building’s total floor area.
2. Incidental repair or processing ancillary to the principal use that does not exceed 5
percent of the gross floor area, subject to the following conditions:
a. The use shall be located to the rear of the principal structure.
b. The use shall meet all conditions of Sections 36-232 (a) and (b).
3. Large Item Retail Sales. The conditions are as follows:
a. The use may not exceed 15% of the building’s total floor area.
4. Parking ramps, subject to the conditions for parking ramps found in Section 36-233
(d)(6).
5. Parking lots.
6. Post Office Customer Service.
7. Showroom.
8. Warehouse / Storage.
(g) Dimensional standards. The dimensional standards are as follows:
1. The height of structures or buildings on sites within the BP zoning district shall be
limited as follows:
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 8
a. Sites located immediately adjacent to property zoned R-1 or R-2 shall be
limited to the lesser of four (4) stories or 55 feet in height.
b. Sites separated by a public right-of-way or not immediately adjacent to
property zoned R-1 or R-2 shall be limited to the lesser of eight (8) stories or
110 feet in height.
2. The floor area ratio for structures or buildings within the BP district shall not exceed
2.0, nor shall the floor area ratio be less than 0.4.
3. Required yard depth (building setbacks) shall follow the requirements of Table 36-
233 (a) except when superseded by the following:
a. No building shall be located closer than 30 feet or the building height,
whichever is greater, to a single family residential property line.
b. The maximum front yard or side yard abutting a street (build-to line) may be
increased to 25 feet from the property line if a courtyard, plaza, or seating
area is incorporated into the development adjacent to the public street.
c. The maximum yard (build-to line) requirement shall apply to at least 50% of
a structure’s elevation along the front yard or side yard abutting a street.
4. Each lot shall contain designed outdoor recreation area (DORA) at the ratio of 0.12
times the gross lot area, with the following exceptions and conditions:
a. DORA shall not be required for any building or portion of a building
dedicated to warehouse, showroom, parking ramp, or parking lot uses.
b. DORA may be reduced by up to 25% if it is connected to and located within
a quarter-mile of the regional trail system.
c. DORA shall be developed into functional and aesthetic yard areas, plazas,
courtyards, and/or pedestrian facilities compatible with or enlarging upon
existing pedestrian links and open space.
d. DORA shall be sited to enhance ecological habitat and increase opportunities
for shared public use with the City’s system of parks and open space
whenever possible.
Secs. 36-23 4-36-240. Reserved.
Table 36-233 (a)
Front Rear Side Side yard abutting
a street
Minimum
yard 5 feet 10 feet 5 feet 5 feet
Maximum
yard 10 feet None None 10 feet
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 9
Environmental Stewardship
34 ComprehensivePlan
IV. Why We Are A Livable Community
B. Land Use Plan
IV-B16 ComprehensivePlan
VIII. CIV- Civic
The Civic land use category is intended for public buildings and
uses as well as similar private uses, such as schools, government
buildings, places of assembly, community centers, libraries and
non-profit institutions.
IX. BP - Business Park
The Business Park land use category is intended to encourage
the creation of significant employment centers that
accommodate a diverse mix of office and light industrial uses
and jobs. The Business Park designation should be applied
to larger sites that can be redeveloped to provide a greater
diversity of jobs, higher development densities and jobs per
acre, higher quality site and building architectural design,
and increased tax revenues for the community. Office, office-
showroom-warehousing, research and development services,
light and high-tech electronic manufacturing and assembly,
and medical laboratories are typical uses appropriate for this
land use category. Some retail and service uses may be allowed
as supporting uses for the primary office and light industrial
uses of the employment center.
X. P - Parks and Open Space
The Parks & Open Space land use category includes all public
parks and open space land, as well as public recreational
facilities, such as the Recreational Center. It also encompasses
lakes and waterways, such as Bass Lake and Minnehaha Creek.
This category is intended for areas which are reserved for active
and passive recreational uses, natural amenities, protected
natural areas, and the City’s major stormwater retention and
drainage areas.
XI. ROW – Public Right-of-Way
The Public Right-of-Way land use category includes right-of-
way for both streets, sidewalks, trails and drainageways.
XII. RRR - Railroad
The Railroad land use category includes right-of-way used for
railway and trail purposes. Some of the land is owned by rail
companies; some of the land is owned by the Hennepin County
Regional Rail Authority and a portion
of it is used as a multi-purpose regional trail operated by
Three Rivers Park District.
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 10
Zoning Districts
Parcels guided for Business Park use
RL - Low Density Residential
RM - Medium Density Residential
RH - High Density Residential
MX - Mixed Use
COM - Commercial
IND - Industrial
OFC - Office
BP - Business Park
CIV - Civic
PRK - Park and Open Space
ROW - Right of Way
RRR - Railroad
2030 Comprehensive Plan MapBeltline Blvd. Area
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 11
Zoning Districts
Parcels guided for Business Park use
RL - Low Density Residential
RM - Medium Density Residential
RH - High Density Residential
MX - Mixed Use
COM - Commercial
IND - Industrial
OFC - Office
BP - Business Park
CIV - Civic
PRK - Park and Open Space
ROW - Right of Way
RRR - Railroad
2030 Comprehensive Plan MapLouisiana Ave. Area
Study Session Meeeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Business Park Zoning District Page 12
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 9
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Community Recreation Facility Planning Update.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No formal action at this time. This report is being provided for informational purposes.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Is the City Council comfortable with the process proposed in this report?
BACKGROUND:
At the January 17 Council Meeting, the City Council approved 20 members which make up the
Community Recreation Facility Task Force. The Task Force met for the first time on January 23
and attended the study session presentation conducted by Dr. Ellen O’Sullivan, a well-known
expert in the area of Parks and Recreation trends. Dr. O’Sullivan shared trends and emerging
directions that may influence facilities and gathering places in the future.
The Task Force met again on February 8. The focus of that meeting was to inform them of the
surveys that had been done (both on-line and by Decision Resources) and to help them
understand the results. Kathy Schoenbauer, the consultant who helped to develop the on-line
survey, presented the results and helped to answer questions about the results and what they
might mean as we move forward with planning for a future facility.
TASK FORCE NEXT STEPS:
On Monday, February 27 Task Force members will be taking a tour of the Chaska and Eden
Prairie Community Centers. They also wanted to tour Edinborough, (the indoor playground, pool
and amphitheater areas) in Edina since several residents referenced that facility in their survey.
Staff has contracted with the Cunningham Group to assist in facilitating the Task Force and to
help with visual diagrams as we progress. After the tour, the next scheduled task force meeting
will be held Monday, March 5. The group will meet monthly. Staff expects to give Council
future updates on the activities of the Task Force as the study progresses.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The cost involved in this task force process will be paid for out of the Organized Recreation
budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This topic is directly related to the results of Vision St. Louis Park and one of the adopted
Strategic Directions that “St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community” and the related Focus Area of “Exploring creation of a multi-use civic center,
including indoor/winter use”.
Prepared by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 10
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Railroad Crossing Signal Replacements: West Lake Street/Library Lane – Project No. 2012-1304
and on Alabama Avenue – Project No. 2012-1305.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None at this time. The purpose of this report is to provide Council with background information
on these two railroad signal replacement projects prior to requesting Council to approve them
and the associated Mn/DOT Cooperative Agreements.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None at this time. Please let staff know of any comments or questions you might have.
BACKGROUND:
History - Several years ago, the City conducted a review with Mn/DOT railroad staff to identify
crossings requiring equipment replacement and/or upgrade needs. The crossings at Alabama
Avenue and West Lake Street/Library Lane were identified as having such needs and were also
determined to be candidates for federal safety funding. As a result, Federal Highway
Administration safety funds have been made available, administered through Mn/DOT. The
improvements would essentially replace old antiquated signal equipment with new railroad
signals and gates. These projects were previously identified in the Capital Improvement
Program (C.I.P.) and are consistent with other infrastructure replacement and public safety
needs.
Mn/DOT has provided two agreements (one for each crossing) for the City’s consideration. The
improvements would be funded 90% using federal safety funds with a 10% match by the City,
with the railroad (CP Rail) being responsible for future signal maintenance costs. Construction
of the improvements would be performed by the railroad and administered by Mn/DOT. These
projects have been in the C.I.P. for several years and the federal funds need to be encumbered
this spring or the funds will be forfeited. The agreements are a standard Mn/DOT signal
agreement that will reimburse the railroad for actual costs incurred. Actual construction would be
either in the fall of 2012 or spring of 2013.
Considerations - Staff had concerns with regards to the uncertainty of freight rail relocation and
whether said crossing improvements would preclude any future crossing changes or adjustments,
especially at Lake Street/Library Lane. Staff therefore contacted our railroad consultant (Dave
McKenzie of S.E.H.) to review the proposed improvements and agreements accordingly. Mr.
McKenzie addresses both crossings by stating that the signal systems can either be adjusted or
relocated in the future should the need arise, and recommends approval (see attached
memorandum). In addition, these improvements would enhance or have a neutral effect on the
ability to implement a Whistle Quiet Zone in the future. Since this project is a safety related
priority and availability of the federal funds is limited, staff also recommends approval.
Study Session of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 10) Page 2
Subject: Railroad Crossing Signal Replacements – W. Lake St/Library Lane & Alabama Ave.
Summary and Next Steps
Staff believes it would be beneficial for the City of St. Louis Park to replace these signals before
the old ones fail. If future freight rail routing impacts their location or need, they can easily be
relocated.
To move these replacements forward, the Council needs to approve the projects and associated
Mn/DOT Cooperative Agreements. Unless Council expresses concern over these replacements,
staff intends to bring these to Council for approval as consent items at the March 5, 2012 Council
meeting.
Finally, even though these are standard Mn/DOT Cooperative Agreements, the City Attorney
will be requested to review the agreements prior to Council action.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Costs
Alabama Avenue $214,000
Lake Street/Library Lane $281,100
Total $495,100
Revenues
90% State Funds (Reimbursable with federal funds) $445,590
10% City (Municipal State Aid) $49,510
Total $495,100
VISION CONSIDERATION:
None.
Attachments: Short Elliott Hendrickson (S.E.H.) Memorandum
Location Map
Prepared by: Scott Brink, City Engineer
Reviewed by: Jack Sullivan, Engineering Project Manager
Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Kevin Locke, Director of Community Development
Meg McMonigal, Planning/Zoning Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196
SEH is an equal opportunity employer | www.sehinc.com | 651.490.2000 | 800.325.2055 | 888.908.8166 fax
MEMORANDUM
TO: Scott Brink, City of St Louis Park
FROM: Dave McKenzie
DATE: February 7, 2012
RE: Railroad crossing improvements for Alabama and Library/Lake crossings.
SEH No. 114331 14.00
Scott,
The two MnDOT agreements attached (#93314 and # 93317) are for improvements to the at grade
crossings at Library/Lake and Alabama. The improvements will replace old antiquated signal equipment
with new railroad signals and gates. The projects are funded using Federal safety funds with a 10%
match by the road authority (City). The railroad is responsible for the maintenance costs. These projects
have been in the program for several years and the Federal funds need to be encumbered this spring or the
funds will be forfeited. The agreements are a standard MnDOT signal agreement that will reimburse the
railroad for actual costs incurred. Actual construction will be either fall of 2012 or spring of 2013.
The City is responsible for any traffic control, sidewalk or roadway changes needed. There may be some
sidewalk repair when the project is completed. Any cables under the roadway will be bored by the
Railroad.
The Alabama Street crossing is north of Excelsior Boulevard and is outside the area where any of the
proposed work for the freight rail reroute. The crossing is at a skewed angle and gates would be an
appropriate safety improvement.
The Library/Lake crossing is a complicated crossing area and new signals with gates would improve the
safety. There are a few issues with location of the signal bases but that can be worked out in final design.
The Library/Lake crossing is in the middle of the potential freight reroute project. The design proposed
by Hennepin County does not change crossing location, but the elevation would change slightly. This
should not affect the signals. If the location was changed, this signal system could be relocated.
I would recommend approval of these agreements.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 10)
Subject: Railroad Crossing Signal Replacements – W. Lake St/Library Lane & Alabama Ave.Page 3
WALKER ST
ALABAMA AVE SSTATE
HI
G
H
W
A
Y
7WO
O
D
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
34TH ST W
CAMBRIDGE ST
ZARTHAN AVE SLI
B
R
A
R
Y
L
N
HAMILTON ST
SERVICE DR HIGHWAY 7
35TH ST W
YOSEMITE AVE SOXFOR
D
S
T
GOODRICH AVE
36TH ST W
37TH ST W
39TH ST W
LOUISIANA AVE S1ST ST NWDAKOTA AVE SHOSPITAL SERVICE DR
BRUNSWICK AVE SB
R
O
W
N
L
O
W
A
V
E
PRIVATE RD
COLORADO AVE SEDGEWOOD AVE SLAKE ST W
MONI
TOR
S
T
G
O
R
H
A
M
A
V
E
G
E
O
R
G
I
A
A
V
E
S
OXFORD ST
WALKER STLAKE ST WDAKOTA AVE S39TH ST W BRUNSWICK AVE SZARTHAN AVE SPRIVATE RDSTATE HIGHWAY 7
YOSEMITE AVE SBRUN
S
WI
C
K
A
V
E
S
DAKOTA AVE SCOLORADO AVE SCrossing Locations
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 10)
Subject: Railroad Crossing Signal Replacements – W. Lake St/Library Lane & Alabama Ave.Page 4
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 11
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
January 2012 Monthly Financial Report.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No action required at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None at this time.
BACKGROUND:
This report is designed to provide summary information each month of the overall level of
revenues and expenditures in both the General Fund and the Park and Recreation Fund. These
funds should be a primary concern in analyzing the City’s financial health because they represent
the discretionary use of tax levy dollars.
Actual expenditures should generally run about 8% of the annual budget in January. Currently,
the General Fund has expenditures totaling 7.7% of the adopted budget and the Park and
Recreation Fund expenditures are at 6.9%. 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.).
Significant variances for both revenues and expenditures are noted below accompanied with a
general discussion of reasons for the variance.
General Fund
Revenues:
• In January, 41% of the license and permit revenues have been received in the General
Fund. This is consistent with prior years in that most 2012 liquor and business license
payments have already been received. In the Administration Department, 97% or
$226,000 of the budgeted liquor license revenues were received in the month of January.
In the Inspections Department, 89% or approximately $470,000 of the business license
revenues for the year have been recorded, with most of the payments coming in late 2011
and deferred to 2012 to accurately reflect the year that the license revenue is earned.
Permit revenues are also at 18% through January.
• Intergovernmental revenue is at 23% of budget because the first 2012 DOT State Aid
payment in the amount of $260,000 was received in January. The second payment for
2012 of a slightly lesser amount will be expected in July or August.
Expenditures:
• The Community Outreach budget is at 51% because the full 2012 payment for
Medication Services was made in January. This expenditure is a substantial portion of
the Community Outreach General Fund budget.
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 11) Page 2
Subject: January 2012 Monthly Financial Report
Parks and Recreation
Revenues:
• The Park & Recreation ice rental revenue currently appears to exceed budget at over
16%. However audit entries will be made in order to recognize revenue in the proper
period. While the funds were received in 2012, any revenue actually earned in the prior
year will need to be booked back to 2011. After these adjustments, the revenues will be
back in line with budget and consistent with prior year.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Regular and timely reporting of financial information is part of the City’s mission of being
stewards of financial resources.
Attachments: Monthly Financial Reports
Prepared by: Darla Monson, Senior Accountant
Reviewed by: Brian Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
2011 2012 2012 Balance Budget
Actual Budget Jan YTD Remaining to Actual %
General Fund Revenues:
General Property Taxes 15,372,076$ 15,998,292$ -$ 15,998,292$ 0.00%
Licenses and Permits 2,801,255 2,368,799 979,807 1,388,992 41.36%
Fines & Forfeits 260,805 328,150 31,367 296,783 9.56%
Intergovernmental 1,229,595 1,163,677 269,116 894,562 23.13%
Charges for Services 1,041,986 1,270,354 6,172 1,264,182 0.49%
Miscellaneous Revenue 128,654 111,650 9,834 101,816 8.81%
Transfers In 2,550,876 2,023,003 166,750 1,856,253 8.24%
Investment Earnings - 125,000 - 125,000 0.00%
Other Income 22,686 3,450 613 2,837 17.76%
Total General Fund Revenues 23,407,933$ 23,392,375$ 1,463,659$ 21,928,716$ 6.26%
Park & Recreation Revenues:
General Property Taxes 4,000,561$ 4,171,506$ -$ 4,171,506$ 0.00%
Licenses and Permits 110 6,600 - 6,600 0.00%
Intergovernmental 149,875 68,902 1,215 67,687 1.76%
Charges for Services 1,097,259 1,070,750 55,032 1,015,718 5.14%
Miscellaneous Revenue 891,796 967,900 159,762 808,138 16.51%
Other Income 6,708 42,150 25 42,125 0.06%
Total Park & Recreation Revenues 6,146,308$ 6,327,808$ 216,034$ 6,111,774$ 3.41%
Summary of Revenues - General Fund and Park & Recreation
As of January 31, 2012
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 11)
Subject: January 2012 Monthly Financial Report Page 3
2011 2012 2012 Balance Budget
Actual Budget Jan YTD Remaining to Actual %
General Government:
Administration 840,217$ 1,012,554$ 70,141$ 942,413$ 6.93%
Accounting 604,926 641,691 49,221 592,470 7.67%
Assessing 506,076 517,840 45,794 472,046 8.84%
Human Resources 628,995 667,612 47,817 619,795 7.16%
Community Development 1,082,311 1,076,376 91,263 985,113 8.48%
Facilities Maintenance 955,880 1,083,128 53,068 1,030,060 4.90%
Information Resources 1,423,244 1,507,579 66,520 1,441,059 4.41%
Communications & Marketing 256,537 265,426 15,307 250,119 5.77%
Community Outreach 84,300 8,185 4,180 4,005 51.07%
Total General Government 6,382,485$ 6,780,391$ 443,312$ 6,337,079$ 6.54%
Public Safety:
Police 6,943,324$ 7,273,723$ 617,071$ 6,656,652$ 8.48%
Fire Protection 3,061,860 3,346,931 273,798 3,073,133 8.18%
Inspectional Services 1,818,075 1,889,340 160,065 1,729,275 8.47%
Total Public Safety 11,823,260$ 12,509,994$ 1,050,935$ 11,459,059$ 8.40%
Public Works:
Public Works Administration 803,310$ 389,783$ 29,832$ 359,951$ 7.65%
Public Works Engineering 816,204 927,337 62,473 864,864 6.74%
Public Works Operations 2,462,641 2,604,870 207,705 2,397,165 7.97%
Total Public Works 4,082,156$ 3,921,990$ 300,011$ 3,621,979$ 7.65%
Non-Departmental:
General 76,397$ -$ -$ -$ 0.00%
Transfers Out - - - - 0.00%
Tax Court Petitions - 180,000 - 180,000 0.00%
Total Non-Departmental 76,397$ 180,000$ -$ 180,000$ 0.00%
Total General Fund Expenditures 22,364,297$ 23,392,375$ 1,794,257$ 21,598,118$ 7.67%
Park & Recreation:
Organized Recreation 1,263,320$ 1,305,747$ 83,063$ 1,222,684$ 6.36%
Recreation Center 1,424,052 1,466,246 91,333 1,374,913 6.23%
Park Maintenance 1,472,838 1,461,645 99,992 1,361,653 6.84%
Westwood 488,550 515,456 36,656 478,800 7.11%
Environment 398,063 390,009 17,905 372,104 4.59%
Vehicle Maintenance 1,268,550 1,188,705 110,182 1,078,523 9.27%
Total Park & Recreation Expenditures 6,315,374$ 6,327,808$ 439,131$ 5,888,677$ 6.94%
Summary of Expenditures - General Fund and Park & Recreation
As of January 31, 2012
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 11)
Subject: January 2012 Monthly Financial Report Page 4
Meeting Date: February 27, 2012
Agenda Item #: 12
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution
Ordinance Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE: Recreational Fire Permits and Fees.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No formal action required. This report is intended to provide information to the City Council on
changes proposed to be made to how the City issues Recreational Fire Permits.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Is the City Council comfortable with the changes proposed to how the Fire Department issues
Recreational Fire Permits?
Does the Council desire to have a study session discussion on these proposed changes?
BACKGROUND:
Staff provided the City Council a report on changes being considered to the Recreational Fire
Permit process for the 12/12/11 Study Session. Staff is now ready to implement these changes.
Currently, city ordinance allows for recreational fire burning by permit, which is administered by
the Fire Department at no cost to the applicant. Recreational permits are good from the date of
issue until December 31st each year.
With the advent and popularity of portable fire pits and other wood burning, smoke producing
appliances over the last decade, more and more annual permits have been requested and the
number of complaints has risen. To combat the increase in complaints, the Fire Department has
increased staff time to thoroughly go over the regulations with each and every permit holder. In
2011 the Fire Department issued 698 recreational fire permits. Below is a chart of permits issued
over the last seven years. As can be seen, the number of permits that have been issued has
increased considerably since 2005:
Year # Permits Issued
2005 270
2006 302
2007 313
2008 470
2009 548
2010 628
2011 698
Listed below are some examples of concerns and/or complaints on burning we received that in
some cases led to fires being extinguished and in some cases, permits being revoked.
• Burning to close to a structure or property line
• Burning construction materials, garbage, furniture, brush and leaves
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 12) Page 2
Subject: Recreational Fire Permits and Fees
• Burning tree stumps with lighter fluid
• Oversized fires
• Fires left unattended
• In 2011 an unattended, unpermitted recreational fire resulted in a neighbor’s garage catching
on fire.
The Fire Department believes that the number of complaints could be substantially reduced by
requiring site drawings, showing the proposed location for the fire pit or appliance on the
property, conducting site inspections to ensure proper setbacks are met, and educating permit
applicants to ensure compliance with State and City fire code regulations. In order to recoup the
cost associated with issuing the permit a $25 permit fee is proposed for a permanent permit. By
issuing a permanent permit the extensive administrative time involved in issuing permits
annually would be reduced significantly. Please note that issuing ongoing permits does not
prohibit the City from revoking permits due to non-compliance.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Charge a $25.00 recreational fire permit fee for a permanent recreational fire permit. The fee
amount was determined based on the property inspection taking approximately 30 minutes, plus
administrative processing and record keeping time. This will reduce future staff time in the
issuing of annual permits and reviewing regulations with permit holders.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable
Attachments: City Code
Proposed 2012 Recreational Burning Permit Application
Prepared by: Cary Smith, Assistant Chief/Fire Marshal
Reviewed by: Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 12) Page 3
Subject: Recreational Fire Permits and Fees
City Code
Sec. 14-73. Prohibited; exemptions.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this article, burners, open burning and recreational fires
shall be prohibited within the city.
(b) The following open burning is permitted within the city, subject to the requirements of
this section, by permit only:
(1)Recreational fires.
(2)Non-recreational open burning.
Exemption to conduct fires under this section does not excuse a person from the
consequences, damages or injuries which may result therefrom nor does it exempt any person
from regulations promulgated by the state pollution control agency or any other governmental
unit exercising jurisdiction in matters of pollution or fire hazard regulation.
(Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000)
Sec. 14-74. Recreational fires.
Recreational fires shall be conducted in accordance with article 11 of the state uniform fire
code, and as specified within the city recreational fire permit application.
(Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000)
Sec. 14-75. Burning permit required.
No person shall start or allow any open burning on any property in the city, including camp
fires and recreational fires, without first having obtained an open burning permit.
(Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000)
Sec. 14-76. Application and fees.
Open burning permits shall be obtained by making application on a form issued by the city
and by paying the permit fee established from time to time by resolution of the city council. The
fire chief shall have the authority to waive the fee required under this section if the fire chief
deems issuance of the permit to be in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the
citizens of the city or to enable the regeneration of vegetation.
(Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000)
Sec. 14-77. Revocation of open burning permit.
The open burning permit is subject to revocation at the discretion of a department of natural
resources forest/conservation officer, the city fire chief or the city fire warden. Reasons for
revocation include, but are not limited to, a fire hazard existing or developing during the course
of the burn, any of the conditions of the permit being violated during the course of the burn,
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 12) Page 4
Subject: Recreational Fire Permits and Fees
pollution or nuisance conditions developing during the course of the burn, or a fire smoldering
with no flame present.
(Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000)
Sec. 14-78. Burning or air quality alert.
No open burning will be permitted when the city or department of natural resources has
officially declared a burning ban due to potential hazardous fire conditions or when the state
pollution control agency (MPCA) has declared an air quality alert.
(Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000)
Sec. 14-79. Rules adopted by reference.
M.S.A. §§ 88.01--88.22 are adopted by reference and made a part of this article as if fully set
forth in this section.
(Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000)
Sec. 14-80. Penalty for violation of article.
Any person violating any provision of this article is guilty of a misdemeanor.
(Ord. No. 2180-00, § 1(8-212), 11-6-2000)
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 12) Page 5
Subject: Recreational Fire Permits and Fees
1) Prior to the permit being issued, an inspection of the fire site or fire receptacle must be completed and approved by the St. Louis Park Fire Department. Inspections will be conducted within five (5) business days of receipt of permit application. Inspections will be typically take place Monday–Friday between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:30 pm and you need not be present unless you need to provide access to the area where the recreational fire will be located. Please include a drawing on the back of this sheet (on the grid) of the fire site location and distances from buildings, decks, property line, etc. 2) The fee for a recreational fire permit is $25.00. The fee is non-refundable should the permit request be denied. 3) This permit will serve as a permanent permit and is not required to be renewed annually, but may be rescinded or cancelled by the St. Louis Park Fire Department at any time. Permit is non-transferable. 4) Recreational fire sites include in-ground or above ground pits, fire rings, portable fire pits, bowls, chimneas and other approved wood burning devices. Natural gas or propane devices do not require a permit. Outdoor fireplaces as defined by the Minnesota State Building Code require a building permit prior to installation, but do not require a recreational burning permit. 5) The hours for recreational fires are 11AM–10PM on Sunday thru Thursday and 11AM–midnight on Friday & Saturday. 6) Fires shall be 3 feet or less in diameter and 3 feet or less in height. Fires shall be contained within a fire ring, pit or similar device constructed for such use. 7) State Fire Code states that fires shall not be located within 25 feet of any structure (including house, garage, decks, sheds, etc.) and shall not be located within 10 feet of the property line. The area within a 5 foot radius and directly above the fire shall be clear of combustible materials. 8) The wood to be burned shall be clean, non-treated wood at least 1” in diameter and produce little detectable smoke or odor. Flammable or combustible liquids, yard waste (branches, twigs, sticks, leaves or grass), garbage, recycling, plastic, furniture, construction materials or treated wood shall not be burned or used as starting materials. 9) Fire extinguishing equipment shall be readily available at all times. This may be a fire extinguisher with a minimum of a 2A rating, garden hose or other equipment designed for such use. 10) The prevailing winds shall be away from nearby residences and shall be 10 MPH or less. 11) The fire shall be attended at all times by at least one responsible person 18 years of age or older. 12) Recreational fires are prohibited when the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has declared a burning ban or the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has issued an air quality alert. 13) The Fire Chief or designee is authorized to order recreational fires immediately discontinued if the smoke emissions are offensive to occupants of surrounding properties or that the fire constitutes a hazardous condition. Please be considerate of your neighbors. 14) If the permit is revoked for any reason, a new application and associated fee will not be accepted for one full year.
Instructions: Please complete the information below and sign the application. Please include a drawing on the back of this sheet (on the grid) of the fire site location and distances from buildings, decks, sheds, property line, etc. You may mail or drop off the application, along with a check made payable to City of St. Louis Park for $25.00 (non-refundable) to City Hall at the address above. Upon receipt of your application we will inspect your property and issue approved permits within five (5) business days. If you are home during our inspection, we will leave the signed permit with you, otherwise, you will be notified that your permit is ready and available to be picked up during normal
St. Louis Park Fire Department
5005 Minnetonka Blvd
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
952-924-2595
Permit application available at City Hall or online at slpfire.org
Permit # 1___- _________
Recreational Fire Application and Permit
Study Session Meeting of February 27, 2012 (Item No. 12) Page 6
Subject: Recreational Fire Permits and Fees
business hours. Please check this box if you wish to be present during the inspection and we will contact you to make an appointment.
Are you the Owner or Renter of this property? Property Owner confirmed in LOGIS Yes No
If you are a renter, please have the property owner sign our permission letter form and include it with the application.
Property Owner or Renter Name: _________________________________________________________ Person filling out this application must use their name - Please print legibly
Address_____________________________________ St. Louis Park, MN Zip Code _______________
Email __________________________________________ Phone#________________________________
I, the undersigned, a legal adult 18 years of age or older, understand this permit does not release me of any liability for damages that may result from a recreational fire. A person without a permit or
in violation of any provision of the permit is subject to a Civil Penalty fine of $50.00 and/or guilty
of a misdemeanor under the City of St. Louis Park Ordinance Section 14-80. A misdemeanor means a crime for which a sentence of not more than 90 days or a fine of not more than $1,000, or both, may be imposed. Applicant Signature_______________________________________ Date__________________________
Fire Department Representative________________________ Date________________________
Copies: White – Fire Department Applicant - Yellow PERMIT NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE FROM FIRE DEPT. REPRESENTATIVE