HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/03/07 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular AGENDA
MARCH 7, 2011
(Councilmember Omodt out)
6:15 p.m. to 7:15 p.m. Boards and Commission Interviews – Westwood Room
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Minutes February 14, 2011
3b. Special Study Session Minutes February 22, 2011
3c. City Council Minutes February 22, 2011
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no
discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a
member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The
items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda.
Recommended Action:
Motion to approve the agenda as presented and to approve items on the consent calendar.
(Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, motion to move items from consent calendar to
regular agenda for discussion and to approve those items remaining on the consent calendar.)
5. Boards and Commissions
5a. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing - Liquor License – Soprano’s Restaurant.
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve application
from Soprano’s Restaurant, LLC dba Soprano’s Restaurant for an on-sale intoxicating
and Sunday liquor license to be located at 5331 West 16th Street with the license term
through March 1, 2012.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8
. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Fire Stations - Approval of Plans and Specifications, and Authorizing Advertisement for
Bids.
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting this report, establishing
and ordering Improvement Project Nos. 20083001 and 20083002, approving plans and
specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for two new fire stations.
Meeting of March 7, 2011
City Council Agenda and Special Study Session
8b. Project Report: Local Street Rehabilitation Project – Pavement Management Area 7,
Project Nos. 2010-1000 & 2011-1400.
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting the project report,
establishing Improvement Project No. 2010-1000 and Improvement Project No. 2011-
1400 approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for
these improvements.
9. Communication
SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers
Immediately Following the City Council Meeting
Discussion Items
1. Highway 100 Project Update
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 of March 7, 2011
City Council Agenda and Special Study Session
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Adopt Resolution approving Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD for the expansion of
the outdoor patio at Granite City, subject to conditions
4b. Approve for Filing Police Advisory Commission Minutes January 5, 2011
4c. Approve for Filing Telecommunications Commission Minutes December 9, 2010
4d. Approve for Filing of Vendor Claims
4e. Approve for Filing Planning Commission Minutes February 16, 2011
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV
cable channel 17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed
live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays
on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of City Hall and on the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17.
The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website.
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
FEBRUARY 14, 2011
The meeting convened at 6:40 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt, Julia Ross, Susan
Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Phil Finkelstein.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin), Director
of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal),
Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guests: David McKenzie, P.E. (SEH, Inc.).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – February 28, 2011
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed study session agenda for February 28th and suggested
that the Council hold a special study session on February 22nd to discuss Council minutes. He
stated that the City Attorney will be present to provide Council with background information
regarding what needs to be included in the minutes.
Councilmember Sanger requested that the Council also receive an update on February 22nd with
respect to snow removal and parking restrictions.
It was the consensus of the City Council to meet at 6:45 p.m. on Tuesday, February 22nd, for a
special study session.
2. Replacement of Virginia Avenue Railroad Bridge
Mr. Rardin presented the staff report and advised that the Virginia Avenue railroad bridge is not
scheduled for replacement. He stated that the Burlington Northern Railroad performed some
routine concrete surface repairs on the bridge last summer and the City will continue to monitor
the bridge to make sure the repairs are sufficient.
Councilmember Ross expressed concern about public safety due to the falling concrete and
requested further information regarding inspections done by the railroad and/or the City.
Mr. Rardin stated that the bridge is structurally sound and the railroad is required to inspect their
bridges and is responsible for the structural integrity of its bridges. He indicated that the falling
debris is not a structural issue and the City will continue to encourage the railroad to monitor the
bridge and keep it in good repair.
Councilmember Mavity indicated that further discussion regarding north-south connections
should take place as the Council talks about redevelopment and opportunities to add additional
routes, e.g., the Nestlé/Novartis site.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3a) Page 2
Subject: Study Session Minutes of February 14, 2011
Mr. Rardin stated that after the Highway 100 discussion last week, further information will be
presented to Council including a study done by SEH that addresses this issue.
3. Freight Rail Options
Mr. Locke presented the staff report.
Mr. McKenzie presented a review of the following three freight rail alternatives:
1. Co-locating freight rail, light rail, and the regional trail in Kenilworth.
2. Co-locating freight and light rail in Kenilworth and moving the regional trial.
3. Utilizing rail rate subsidies for TCW to operate on routes west of the metro.
He noted that the County’s consultants continue to work on the EAW with respect to rerouting
the TCW onto MNS and are preparing information on revised alignments, preliminary noise and
vibration, and mitigation.
Mr. McKenzie provided an overview of the western connection which looked at rerouting all of
the TCW traffic to the west. He explained that TCW’s primary run is into St. Paul and there are
very few connections heading west. There are poor track conditions on the western side and
TCW is reluctant to run heavy coal trains across those lines. He stated that one possibility would
be to improve the track and bypass the coal trains and not bring them into the Twin Cities;
however, TCW runs four different types of trains and rerouting this traffic would add
approximately 120 miles to its route, as well as increasing travel time for a single car by two or
three days because of the way that BNSF operates the line. He indicated that along with the
increased distance, the railroad would incur increased travel time, car hire costs, labor costs,
locomotive costs, and track rental fees. He stated that SEH has concluded that without further
detailed analysis of costs, the rerouting of coal trains may be possible with additional track and
there may be funding opportunities available with Mn/DOT or the FRA to help fund additional
track work; rerouting of other TCW traffic is not practical at this time and there do not appear to
be any funding sources available for a freight subsidy with TCW. He added that a total rerouting
of all TCW traffic did not appear viable at this time and TCW has indicated that this would cause
them to lose their competitive advantage.
Councilmember Mavity asked if the BNSF line has the capacity to handle TCW traffic and what
steps would be necessary to pursue this option.
Mr. McKenzie stated that they are currently running 12-15 trains per day and typical capacity is
20-25 trains, depending on the location of the sidings, so it appears that there is currently
sufficient capacity. He noted that it will be necessary to get BNSF to the table to talk about this
and to identify ongoing funding sources. He explained that it would be necessary to first define
the scope of a rehab project of this nature and TCW has indicated that a project of this type
would require approximately 15,000 ties, or roughly $2 million, and there are programs that may
or may not fit with Mn/DOT or the FRA to provide assistance. He added that if would be helpful
to have Mn/DOT take the lead on this.
Mr. McKenzie then presented information regarding the Kenilworth corridor, noting that SEH
concentrated its efforts on the area from Lake Street to I-394 because this area has the most
restricted right-of-way. He stated that the analysis looked at retaining the freight rail track on the
existing alignment as well as expanding two options that were studied by RL Banks (Scenario
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3a) Page 3
Subject: Study Session Minutes of February 14, 2011
1A and Scenario 2A). He explained that by leaving freight rail on the existing alignment, light
rail ends up in the condo parcel on the east side and there is very little excess right-of-way
adjacent to the east side of the existing corridor. He indicated that this appears to be an
unfeasible alignment due to the complexity and cost involved.
Mr. McKenzie reviewed Scenario 1A which explored the alignment of freight rail, light rail, and
the regional trail in the Kenilworth corridor. He stated that this scenario proposes to acquire half
of the Cedar Shores townhome development; the apartment building at Sunset Boulevard would
also be impacted. He advised that the County currently has 62’ of right-of-way. North of Cedar
Lake Parkway, the right of way narrows to 44’ but there is a public right-of-way owned by the
City of Minneapolis adjacent to this area that is 50’ wide; the County has made the assumption
that this right-of-way is available for light rail. He indicated that Scenario 1A shifted all three
alignments from what was shown by SWLRT, and the 21st Street light rail station was shifted to
the east.
Councilmember Sanger asked if it can be inferred that there would be no significant impediment
to the County in acquiring the City of Minneapolis right-of-way for construction of light rail.
She also asked if light rail would fit if the City of Minneapolis right-of-way were not acquired.
Mr. McKenzie stated that the right-of-way acquisition has not yet been resolved. He also stated
that if the right-of-way were not acquired, it would be a tight fit for light rail. He indicated that
on Cedar Lake Boulevard, the light rail was showing a grade separation with freight rail next to
it, and SEH is showing all three at grade for ease of construction.
Mr. McKenzie reviewed Scenario 2A which explored alignment of freight rail and light rail at
grade with the regional trail relocated outside of the Kenilworth corridor. He advised that the
deletion of the trail allows enough space for freight rail and light rail to fit in the corridor if land
is acquired from the Cedar Shores townhome development to expand the right-of-way for the
freight rail tracks; no structures would need to be acquired under this scenario. He discussed the
setbacks of the freight rail track to the buildings and advised that under this scenario, nine of the
thirteen townhomes would be closer to the tracks than they are today. He indicated that more
work is required to determine if the freight track alignment results in traffic being uncomfortably
close to the townhome structures. He added that in order to meet a 50’ residential structure
separation from freight rail 33 Cedar Shore Townhomes would need to be removed. If all 57
Cedar Shores townhomes were removed the cost is estimated to be $35 million, including
relocation and demolition costs. He noted that further work is needed to determine how the
Midtown Greenway trail would connect under this scenario.
Mr. McKenzie then discussed unresolved issues with the Kenilworth corridor, including
environmental impacts to parkland and how the Federal agencies will look at what is being
impacted as well as the best places for freight rail and light rail to cross. He noted that it appears
that freight rail and light rail fit better to the south between Belt Line and Lake Street east of
Highway 100. He indicated that the Mn/DOT redesign of Highway 100 will need to be reviewed
in terms of how freight rail and light rail elevation impacts those designs. He stated that another
issue is right-of-way and how to handle possible acquisitions. He discussed the design issues
with light rail, including retaining walls, design of the light rail stations, pedestrian circulation, as
well as redevelopment around the light rail stations.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3a) Page 4
Subject: Study Session Minutes of February 14, 2011
Mr. Mckenzie pointed out that an additional issue deals with the Kenilworth corridor compared
to the MNS route; the PMT is scheduled to meet on February 24th and SEH will continue to work
on refining its cost estimates on the Kenilworth alternatives so that when the MNS study is
complete, SEH will have a good comparison of the costs involved and will be able to provide the
City with an evaluation of the overall impacts to the City.
Councilmember Sanger stated that one of the alignments referenced structures being
“uncomfortably close” to the tracks and the report also referenced trying to have a distance of
50’ from structures to the tracks. She asked if it that same 50’ minimum distance between
structures and tracks should be used throughout the City in order to provide an apples to apples
comparison of all the alternatives. She also asked if an acceptable distance would include a
person’s back yard that was 25’ deep.
Mr. Locke stated that 50’ represents a good standard from the centerline of the track to a
habitable structure; staff is also suggesting that a minimum of 25’ of right-of-way from the
centerline is desirable. He noted that a number of factors need to be considered in any given
situation for an acceptable buffer and it is important to recognize the difference between the
space from the centerline of the tracks and a garage versus the centerline of the tracks and an
actual home. He advised that the City did an analysis some time ago regarding right-of-way and
proximity of trains, and there are only a couple of homes that are 25-50’ from the centerline of
existing tracks on the MNS route.
Councilmember Sanger indicated that if 50’ is used as a guideline for the MNS study, she would
like to see some analysis of what that would mean in terms of how many townhomes and/or
houses would need to be acquired in order to provide a clear apples to apples comparison. She
also requested information regarding the general approach used in evaluating impacts to single
family homes versus other structures. She expressed concern that back yards represent living
space for people.
Mr. Locke stated that this is a legitimate issue in terms of outdoor living space and how it may be
affected; for this analysis, SEH used a stricter standard that focused on the Kenilworth
alternatives and did not attempt to compare it with the MNS alternative yet. He added that SEH
only looked at whether a structure would be affected within the 50’ distance and whether the
property was impacted to the point of needing to acquire it.
Councilmember Mavity asked if Scenario 1A or 2A consider removal of the “Y” or any other
traffic issues south of Highway 7.
Mr. McKenzie stated that if freight rail stays in the Kenilworth corridor, the alignments and the
“Y” in St. Louis Park could remain the same and it would be up to the railroad to deem how well
it works for them. He added that the Kimley Horn study will provide more answers to this
question.
Councilmember Mavity requested clarification regarding the decision-making process and the
City’s role in that process. She also asked what types of discussions the City is having with the
railroads and reiterated her suggestion to extend an invitation to the railroad to discuss the matter
with Council.
Councilmember Ross agreed but felt that the City’s emphasis should be on mitigation.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3a) Page 5
Subject: Study Session Minutes of February 14, 2011
Mr. Locke stated that as Commissioner Dorfman indicated earlier, it will be important for all of
the stakeholders involved to reach consensus, including the City. He stated that staff is working
to get information to Council so that it can make an informed decision as to what the City feels is
the best thing to do and ultimately build consensus with the County and the City of Minneapolis.
He added that the railroad ultimately has to approve the plan because they are directly impacted
by this.
Councilmember Sanger stated that Councilmember Finkelstein requested information regarding
Federal funding for light rail given the current political climate and change in the legislature.
Councilmember Mavity indicated that even if the legislature does not invest in light rail this year,
it will be important to stay in the queue for Federal funding and to continue work on this project.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to continue next steps on this project,
including the initiation of a process for community input.
4. Human Rights Commission (HRC) 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she felt the annual reports and work plans as presented were
sufficient and did not feel it was necessary for Council to meet with the Human Rights
Commission (HRC), Police Advisory Commission (PAC), or Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA).
Councilmember Ross expressed concern regarding the HRC’s goals and projects because she did
not see anything fresh or new. She added that a Human Rights Commission candidate
interviewed by Council earlier this evening had some interesting ideas around bullying and
mental health and thought this may be of interest to the Human Rights Commission.
Councilmember Mavity stated that the HRC’s annual report indicated that they had lost some
members through attrition and suggested that the HRC’s 2011 work plan include looking at best
practices and/or other high functioning human rights councils so they can learn from those best
practices to build energy and membership on the HRC. She also suggested that the Diversity
Lens include clear steps on how this is realized in the community. She felt that it would be
valuable to meet with the HRC and to have the HRC highlight for Council what it feels are the
key issues facing the community.
It was the consensus of the City Council to meet with the Human Rights Commission to discuss
the annual report and work plan.
5. Police Advisory Commission (PAC) 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work Plan
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
It was the consensus of the City Council to meet with the Police Advisory Commission to
discuss the annual report and work plan.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3a) Page 6
Subject: Study Session Minutes of February 14, 2011
6. Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA) 2010 Annual Report
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
It was the consensus of the City Council that no meeting is required with the Board of Zoning
Appeals to discuss the annual report.
7. Communications/Meeting Check-in (Verbal)
Mr. Zwilling updated Council regarding the asbestos issue reported today at the high school and
junior high school. He stated that the City does not have any direct involvement in the matter
but has offered its inspections department to assist with questions. He indicated that both the
high school and junior high will be closed on Tuesday to allow the additional testing to be
completed.
Mr. Harmening discussed the citizen notification system update provided in Council’s agenda
and stated that this system could be used in partnership with the School District.
The meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
8. Citizen Notification Systems Update
9. “Dream Elevator” Public Art Sculpture – W. 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue
10. 2011 Liquor License Renewal – Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar & Grill
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
FEBRUARY 22, 2011
The meeting convened at 6:35 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein, Julia Ross, Susan Sanger, and
Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Anne Mavity and Paul Omodt.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), City Clerk (Ms.
Stroth), Police Chief (Mr. Luse), Fire Chief (Mr. Stemmer), Communications Coordinator (Mr.
Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Update on Voluntary Parking Restrictions
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
Mr. Stemmer reported that staff has been actively driving around the neighborhoods and has seen
85-90% compliance from residents on the voluntary parking restrictions. He stated that the City
streets are narrower now than before the recent thaw due to the weekend snowstorm.
Councilmember Ross expressed concern regarding Nevada Avenue and it does not appear that
residents are complying with the voluntary parking restrictions in that area. She stated that she
felt there are various areas where the City should consider posting no parking signs.
Mr. Stemmer indicated that one of the issues with Nevada Avenue is that the apartment buildings
do not have adequate parking.
Councilmember Sanger expressed concern regarding Ottowa Avenue and asked if the City could
ask the residents in that area to park in the City’s side lot.
Mr. Harmening indicated that the City’s side lot is half-owned by the City and half-owned by the
commercial property owner. He agreed to inquire about allowing residents to park in this lot.
Mr. Luse discussed the City’s strategy with the voluntary parking restrictions and agreed to look
into the concerns expressed regarding Nevada Avenue. He stated that the Police Department’s
CSOs and Reserve Officers are reporting high compliance with the program.
Councilmember Ross requested that the CSOs check in with residents at apartment buildings so
the residents understand the parking restrictions.
Councilmember Sanger asked if businesses and/or churches are being asked to help publicize the
parking restrictions.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3b) Page 2
Subject: Special Study Session Minutes of February 22, 2011
Mr. Harmening advised that staff will continue to monitor the voluntary parking restrictions
program with the understanding that there may be some streets where no parking signs will need
to be posted.
Councilmember Sanger encouraged staff to post no parking signs if staff feels that traffic cannot
flow or emergency vehicles cannot get through. She added that she would rather have an angry
resident than risk having an emergency vehicle not be able to get through in an emergency. She
asked that the City make it clear where parking is banned if it needs to post no parking signs.
Mr. Harmening stated that the City will notify residents along a particular street where parking is
going to be restricted.
Councilmember Finkelstein requested that the City Council receive an update at a future meeting
regarding the potential for spring flooding.
Mr. Harmening advised that Mr. Stemmer and staff recently met to review the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District flood predictions and projections. He indicated the City currently looks like
it will be okay but the situation needs to be reassessed and monitored over the coming months.
He stated that the City is considering sending a letter to property owners along Minnehaha Creek
to keep them updated on the flood predictions and to provide resources on where they can obtain
further information.
Councilmember Finkelstein suggested that the City immediately post information on its website
regarding flood insurance because any flood insurance needs to be in place for thirty days. He
also suggested that the City send a letter to the County and to Mn/DOT asking about their plans
for flood control on the City’s County and State roads.
Councilmember Sanger stated that the City will need to have alternative plans in place if any of
the City’s major roads become impassible due to flooding.
Mr. Stemmer indicated that the City has recently done a lot of mitigation work with respect to
water issues in areas around the City.
Councilmember Ross asked if the City has sandbags available for residents.
Mr. Stemmer replied that the City has sandbags and sand available and volunteers would be
needed to help with filling. He added that the City has ordered additional sandbags this year.
Mr. Zwilling indicated that the City has a good network in place among neighborhood leaders
and civic groups, as well as the City’s various media tools and people are generally very
responsive to calls for assistance. He added that the City also has relationships through the Red
Cross and Salvation Army that would provide assistance with organizing volunteers.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to use its discretion in determining
whether to post no parking signs on the City’s streets if it is determined that traffic is inhibited,
especially as it relates to public safety services.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3b) Page 3
Subject: Special Study Session Minutes of February 22, 2011
2. City Council Records/Minutes
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report. He stated that staff has received comments from
Councilmembers about the minutes not being thorough enough and there appear to be a
significant amount of corrections being made to the minutes.
Mr. Scott reviewed the statutory requirements for meeting minutes and indicated that the statute
requires only that official actions be recorded and the decision regarding how extensive the
minutes should be is left to the governing body’s discretion. He stated that the tape recordings of
City Council meetings become the official record if the City should get into a Court proceeding.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated that he felt staff does an excellent job on the Council minutes.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she did not feel it was a problem that Councilmembers make
amendments to the minutes and felt that for the most part, the minutes are fine. She requested
that the minutes be presented to Council for approval on a more timely basis. She also requested
that the minutes as well as staff reports be more thoroughly reviewed by staff in terms of
grammar and spelling.
It was the consensus of the City Council not to change the approach for how meeting minutes are
written for study sessions or regular City Council meetings.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
3. Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project Update
The meeting adjourned at 7:14 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 3c
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
FEBRUARY 22, 2011
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein, Julia Ross, Susan Sanger, and Sue
Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Councilmembers Anne Mavity and Paul Omodt.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), City Clerk (Ms.
Stroth), Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Larsen), Community Development Director (Mr.
Locke), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Communications Coordinator (Mr.
Zwilling), Human Resources Coordinator (Ms. Fosse), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations - None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Minutes January 24, 2011
Councilmember Santa requested that the fifth paragraph on page 7 be amended to reflect
that a discussion took place regarding the E-Learning Program and that this program was
available to City staff.
Councilmember Finkelstein requested that the second sentence of the fourth paragraph on
page 4 be amended to reflect that this statement was made by Councilmember Sanger.
The minutes were approved as amended.
3b. Special Study Session Minutes February 7, 2011
Councilmember Ross requested that the second paragraph under agenda item 1 on page 1
be amended to state “Councilmember Ross expressed concern as to whether a one-day
workshop would be sufficient given the number of significant issues needing to be
addressed by the Council and suggested holding a two-day workshop in order to avoid
the need for additional study sessions due to the larger issues currently on the table that
Council should be discussing.
Councilmember Sanger requested that the recess referred to on page 2 be clarified to state
“Mayor Pro Tem Sanger recessed the Special City Council Study Session at 7:25 p.m. in
order to convene the City Council meeting.”
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3c) Page 2
Subject: City Council Minutes of February 22, 2011
Councilmember Sanger also requested that page 2 be amended by moving the reference
to “written reports provided and documented for recording purposes only” and “Report
on Freight Rail Alternatives” to follow the statement that the special study session was
reconvened at 7:53 p.m.
The minutes were approved as amended.
3c. City Council Minutes February 7, 2011
The minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine
and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is
desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an
appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion.
4a. Execute a 2011 contract with Uppercut Tree Service, Inc. for the removal of
diseased trees on private property in an amount not to exceed $97,422.00.
4b. Execute a contract with Precision Landscape & Tree, Inc. for the 2011 Boulevard
Tree and Stump Removal Program in an amount not to exceed $83,657.00.
4c. Adopt Resolution No. 11-027 authorizing the execution of a grant agreement
with the State of Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources.
4d. Adopt Resolution No. 11-028 requesting a variance from Minnesota Rules for
State Aid Operations Chapter 8820 for Municipal State Aid Project No. 163-318-
001 (W. 44th Street from Brookside Terrace to France Avenue).
4e. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Most Holy Trinity
Catholic Parish located at 4017 Utica Avenue South for a Fish Fry Event to be
held on Friday, March 18, 2011.
4f. Approve for Filing Fire Civil Service Commission Minutes July 14, 2010.
4g. Approve for Filing Planning Commission Minutes December 15, 2010.
4h. Approve for Filing Planning Commission Minutes February 2, 2011.
4i. Approve for Filing of Vendor Claims.
It was moved by Councilmember Finkelstein, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to
approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of
all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 5-0 (Councilmembers Mavity and Omodt absent).
5. Boards and Commissions - None
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing to Consider Allocation of 2011 Grant Year Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds
Resolution No. 11-029
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3c) Page 3
Subject: City Council Minutes of February 22, 2011
Ms. Larsen presented the staff report and advised that the City is estimated to receive
approximately $222,000 in 2011 which is the same amount received in 2010. She
discussed the proposed 2011 allocation of CDBG funds which includes $144,931 aimed
at assisting low income single family homeowners with emergency repairs, rehab loans
and affordable ownership opportunities, $37,500 to the City’s emergency repair program
which focuses on low income seniors and vulnerable residents and provides grants up to
$4,000 for emergencies such as leaking roofs, $65,431 for the City’s low income single
family home rehab loan program which assists with bringing homes into code compliance
with a maximum loan amount of $25,000, $20,000 for the Homes within Reach program
which is an Affording Housing Land Trust program that purchases homes and sells them
to low income homeowners, $22,000 for Habitat for Humanity to acquire and construct a
new affordable single family home at 3317 Texas Avenue, $70,000 for St. Louis Park
Emergency Program (STEP) to repair and replace the roof at their facility, and $7,500 to
the City’s park and recreation programming at Meadowbrook Manor and Aquila Parks to
ensure affordable registration fees for youth park programming at these locations. She
noted that actual 2011 Federal funding is still unknown; in the event that funding is
reduced, staff will provide the Council with revised project allocations.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing.
Ms. Jackie Olafson, STEP Executive Director, appeared before the City Council and
expressed the organization’s appreciation to the City for its allocation of CDBG funds for
replacement of the roof.
Councilmember Finkelstein presented a donation of food items from Fishman’s Deli
following the recent closure of the deli.
Mr. Bill O’Meara, Community Action Partners for Suburban Hennepin County, appeared
before the City Council and provided a brief summation of projects undertaken by the
organization, including educating 20 first-time homebuyers, assisting residents with
refinancing options and foreclosure, providing literacy workshops, as well as providing
1,014 residents with energy assistance that included help with paying their energy bills,
replacing seven furnaces and repairing 17 furnaces. He expressed his appreciation to the
City for its support of the Emergency Home Repair Program.
Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Ross expressed her appreciation to the City and to the community
organizations involved in helping people who need it the most.
Mayor Jacobs stated that he is a member of the STEP Board of Directors and asked if he
should abstain from voting on this item.
Mr. Scott advised Mayor Jacobs that he could vote on this item.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt
Resolution No. 11-029 Approving Proposed Use of 2011 Urban Hennepin County
Community Development Block Grant Program Funds and Authorizing Execution of
Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County and any Third Party Agreements.
The motion passed 5-0 (Councilmembers Mavity and Omodt absent).
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3c) Page 4
Subject: City Council Minutes of February 22, 2011
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. 2011 Liquor License Renewal – Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar and Grill
Resolution No. 11-030
Ms. Stroth presented the staff report and stated that CRGE Minneapolis, LLC, dba Toby
Keith’s I Love This Bar, has made application for renewal of its on-sale intoxicating and
Sunday liquor license. She advised that City Code requires all on-sale liquor licensees to
meet the requirement of at least 50% of the gross receipts be attributable to the sale of
food. She stated that the applicant began operations in June 2010 and their food and
liquor sales for the first year did not meet the City’s criteria; however, the Chief Financial
Officer of the company indicated that because the establishment was not in business for a
full 12 months, the food and liquor sales did not represent an accurate picture consistent
with their restaurants in other states. She indicated that the General Manager of the
restaurant submitted a letter to the City addressing the compliance issue and proposes to
increase the restaurant’s menu and to add additional outdoor seating. She added that the
City’s ordinance allows the City to attach special conditions to the license renewal,
including placing the licensee on probationary status for six months; it is also proposed
that the licensee be required to provide an additional report by September 15, 2011, for
food and liquor sales for January 1, 2011 through August 31, 2011.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated that the City has a long-standing history of requiring
liquor establishments to serve food and to have a 50-50 split between food and liquor
sales. He felt that the proposed plan by the applicant was insufficient and did not appear
to consider other options for increasing food sales, e.g., lunch specials and/or happy hour
food. He stated that he did not want to have a situation where the City would be required
to assess penalties on the establishment in six months’ time and suggested that the
applicant be required to come back to the Council in one month with a more thoughtful
plan for increasing food sales.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she did not think it was the Council’s job to identify
what the restaurant should do to come into compliance with the ordinance; rather, the
Council’s job is to identify for the restaurant what the consequences will be if it does not
come into compliance with the City’s ordinance in the next six months. She indicated her
agreement with the stated condition of probationary status and suggested that the
resolution specify more clearly that the restaurant will lose its license if it does not come
into compliance in six months. She felt that the plan outlined by the restaurant was a
start, but did not represent enough effort to bring the restaurant into compliance. She
added that she wants to see the restaurant be successful and her goal is not to shut down
the restaurant, but for the establishment to comply with the City’s requirements so that
there are fewer DWI’s and alcohol-related crashes from customers leaving the premises.
Mr. Harmening indicated that the City has put the restaurant on notice that they have not
met the City’s ordinance requirement of at least 50% of gross receipts attributable to food
sales; as a result, the City will place the license on probationary status for six months. He
advised that the resolution clearly states that staff will report the probationary results to
Council in September and if the restaurant is not in compliance, Council may take further
action up to and including revocation of the license.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3c) Page 5
Subject: City Council Minutes of February 22, 2011
Councilmember Sanger suggested that the Council be provided with an interim report in
three months to see if the food sales are trending upward. She also suggested that
condition #4 in the resolution be revised to state that the license will be revoked after six
months unless the licensee can show good reason why it should not be revoked.
Mayor Jacobs stated he was not comfortable with changing condition #4 in the resolution
and felt that the language stating that “council may take further action during this license
period up to and including revocation of the license” was sufficient.
Councilmember Ross agreed with Mayor Jacobs and stated that the restaurant is aware of
the six month requirement and it is up to them to figure out how to meet the City’s
ordinance requirements.
It was moved by Councilmember Ross, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt
Resolution No. 11-030 Approving Issuance of Liquor License Renewal with Conditions
for CRGE Minneapolis, LLC, dba Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar, 1623 Park Place
Boulevard for March 1, 2011 through March 1, 2012.
Councilmember Finkelstein requested a friendly amendment to the motion requiring the
licensee to provide the City with a report of food and liquor sales within three months of
the license renewal, and to direct staff to provide Council with a written report.
Councilmember Ross agreed to the friendly amendment.
Councilmember Santa seconded the friendly amendment.
The motion passed 5-0 (Councilmembers Mavity and Omodt absent).
8b. Gambling Premises Permit for Plymouth Lions Club
Resolution No. 11-031
Ms. Stroth presented the staff report and stated the City received a premises permit
application to operate pull tabs at Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar & Grill. She advised that
the Plymouth Lions Club plans to work with the St. Louis Park Lions and look for
opportunities to benefit residents in St. Louis Park and in the trade area. She indicated
that the Plymouth Lions will be required to contribute 10% of net profits from the pull
tabs operation to the City pursuant to City Code, together with the local gambling tax of
$3,000 per year or 3% of gross receipts from all lawful gambling less prizes paid out,
whichever is less.
Councilmember Finkelstein expressed concern regarding the premises permit and stated
that it was his understanding that as of this evening, there was still no written agreement
in place with the St. Louis Park Lions as to how the Plymouth Lions will handle
donations or expend money from the pull tabs operation in St. Louis Park. He requested
that Council defer action on this item until a written agreement is presented reflecting
how the Plymouth Lions will expend its proceeds from lawful gambling.
Mr. Kris St. Martin, President, Plymouth Lions Club, appeared before the City Council
and stated that the Plymouth Lions approached the St. Louis Park Lions about operating
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3c) Page 6
Subject: City Council Minutes of February 22, 2011
lawful gambling at Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar & Grill and requested that the two
organizations work closely together to ensure that gambling proceeds are expended in St.
Louis Park. He indicated that no formal agreement is in place with the St. Louis Park
Lions, but the letter provided to the City states that the Plymouth Lions intend to work
closely with the St. Louis Park Lions.
Councilmember Sanger stated that it was important to her to make sure the bulk of lawful
gambling proceeds benefit the City and it would be helpful to understand the proposed
allocation of proceeds.
Mr. St. Martin indicated that the letter from the Plymouth Lions Club includes parameters
for donations, including 5-10% to community organizations or events in St. Louis Park,
at least 50% to needs-based organizations, e.g., women’s shelters, and 20-35% to broader
Lions projects located within the trade area. He added that the Plymouth Lions Club did
not want more than 5-10% of proceeds to be used for sponsoring baseball teams.
Ms. Stroth stated that State law does not provide authority to cities on what specific
lawful purpose expenditures can be and the Plymouth Lions is required to contribute 10%
of net profits to a fund regulated by the City.
Mr. Scott noted that the City cannot include a specific legal condition requiring that the
organization spend “x” amount of dollars in St. Louis Park; the organization is only
required to expend 90% of its lawful purpose expenditures within the trade area.
Councilmember Ross questioned whether this premises permit discussion is premature
given the restaurant’s probationary status of its liquor license.
Councilmember Sanger agreed and did not want to see the Plymouth Lions get caught in
the middle of the liquor license issue. She agreed that deferring action on this item
makes sense.
Mr. Kent Kramer, General Manager of Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar & Grill, appeared
before the City Council and stated that he will do everything possible to increase food
sales and meet the City’s 50% food sales requirement. He indicated that he approached
the Lions organization about the pull tabs operation and informed them that they would
have to give at least 50% of proceeds to St. Louis Park organizations.
Mr. Jim Bremer, Plymouth Lions Club Vice President, appeared before the City Council
and indicated that the Plymouth Lions Club is committed to working with the St. Louis
Park Lions Club. He urged the Council to approve this premises permit so that the
organization can make money and the proceeds can be donated and put it back into the
community as soon as possible.
Ms. Tracy Ohlendorf, Gambling Manager for Plymouth Lions Club, appeared before the
City Council and stated that the agreement with Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar & Grill
provides that the restaurant can terminate its lease with the Plymouth Lions Club upon
thirty days notice. She indicated that one reason for terminating the lease would be if the
Plymouth Lions Club were not providing 50% of gambling proceeds to St. Louis Park
organizations.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3c) Page 7
Subject: City Council Minutes of February 22, 2011
It was moved by Councilmember Ross, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt
Resolution No. 11-031 Approving Issuance of a Premises Permit for Lawful Gambling to
be Conducted by Plymouth Lions Club at Toby Keith’s I Love This Bar & Grill, 1623
Park Place Boulevard.
The motion passed 4-1 (Councilmember Finkelstein opposed; Councilmembers Mavity
and Omodt absent).
8c. Operating Agreement with St. Louis Park Convention and Visitors Bureau
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and proposed Operating Agreement between the City
and the recently formed St. Louis Park Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB), which
delineates the working relationship between the CVB and the City. He stated that the
agreement specifies responsibilities and services to be rendered during the first year of
operation and the CVB is required to submit a budget prior to September 1st of each year
to Council and this will provide an opportunity for Council to review the CVB’s
priorities. He pointed out that the Council ultimately has the ability to pull CVB funding
on 90 days notice.
Mayor Jacobs expressed the Council’s thanks to City staff and to Bruce Nustad from
TwinWest Chamber of Commerce for their efforts.
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to
approve proposed Operating Agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and the St.
Louis Park Convention and Visitors Bureau.
The motion passed 5-0 (Councilmembers Mavity and Omodt absent).
8d. Resolution Approving 2011 International Union of Operating Engineers
(IUOE) Local #49 Labor Agreement
Resolution No. 11-032
Ms. Fosse presented the staff report and advised that Local #49 has agreed to a 0% wage
increase for 2011, which is the same as the non-union and other settled groups, as well as
an additional $65 in benefits, and a one time taxable lump sum payment in the amount of
$270.40. She indicated that new holiday language was negotiated that requires
employees to be compensated at two times their hourly wage if they are called in to work
unscheduled hours on Thanksgiving and Christmas. She stated that medical layoff
language has been added that allows recall rights, language was also added limiting the
hiring of temporary or seasonal employees to a 168 day window, and language was added
allowing leave to be used in accordance with the City’s domestic partner ordinance.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt
Resolution No. 11-032 Approving the Labor Agreement Between the City of St. Louis
Park and International Union of Operating Engineers, Local #49 – January 1, 2011-
December 31, 2011.
The motion passed 5-0 (Councilmembers Mavity and Omodt absent).
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item 3c) Page 8
Subject: City Council Minutes of February 22, 2011
Mayor Jacobs expressed his thanks to the union and City staff for their efforts in reaching
agreement on the contract. He noted that the City has a long history of harmonious labor
relations and the City values all of its employees.
9. Communications
Mayor Jacobs stated that the Public Works staff is working hard to remove the snow
expressed the Council’s thanks to the Public Works staff and to everyone who has
worked hard plowing snow. He encouraged residents to comply with the voluntary
parking restrictions which will make it easier to plow and easier for large vehicles to get
through on the City streets, particularly public safety vehicles responding to an
emergency.
Councilmember Finkelstein expressed the City Council’s thanks to Fishman’s Deli for 15
years of great service to the City.
Councilmember Santa reminded residents of the Home Remodeling Fair on Sunday,
February 27th, from 10:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. at Eisenhower Community Center in
Hopkins.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:32 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4a
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:
Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt a Resolution approving Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD for the
expansion of the outdoor patio at Granite City, subject to conditions.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to approve the Major Amendment with conditions as recommended by
staff and the Planning Commission?
BACKGROUND:
Requested is a Major Amendment to the Tower Place Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow
for the expansion of an outdoor patio by Granite City Food & Brewery. The request is required
because the expanded outdoor patio changes the underlying parking requirements for the PUD.
The Tower Place PUD encompasses the Granite City restaurant, Mann Theaters, Boston Market,
and McDonald’s restaurant, all located along Excelsior Boulevard and immediately east of
Highway 100. Granite City opened in 2006 in the former Timber Lodge Steakhouse building.
Site Area:
5.1 acres (222,156 square feet)
Comprehensive Plan:
Commercial
Zoning:
C-2, General Commercial
Available parking:
312 spaces (south)
414 spaces (north – pm only)
Granite City installed a 500 square foot patio in the summer of 2010. The Zoning Ordinance
exempts patios of up to 500 square feet from the standards for off-street parking. At the present
time, Granite City is proposing to expand the existing outdoor patio from 500 square feet to
1,200 square feet, to install a stone wall surrounding the patio, and to install new landscaping
between the patio and Park Center Boulevard to serve as a buffer for the customers dining
outdoors.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
Analysis:
Construction of a new outdoor patio fits within the purpose and intent of the original Tower
Place PUD. Although the new patio would be constructed closer to the west property line than
the existing building, the Zoning Ordinance exempts patios from typical yard (setback)
requirements:
Sec. 36-73 (b)(4). Yard Encroachments. “The following shall not be encroachments on
yard requirements for principal buildings…uncovered porches, stoops, patios, or
decks…”
Parking
The primary issue under review is the parking requirement. The existing restaurant of
approximately 9,000 square feet has an overall parking requirement of 150 spaces. The 1200
square foot patio addition will add to this requirement; though the Zoning Ordinance exempts
500 square feet of the patio from the parking requirement, the additional 700 square feet
increases the parking requirement by 12 spaces. The parking provided on-site, paired with the
shared parking available to the north of the restaurant, provides sufficient parking for all Granite
City customers as well as customers of other businesses in the PUD.
Granite City has requested that the patio addition be considered for “shared parking” between the
existing restaurant seating areas and the proposed patio. The shared parking is allowed when
uses “have their highest peak demand for parking at substantially different times of the day or
week” (Section 36-361 (f)). The narrative provided by the applicant states that “the patio will
primarily be used between the months of May to September. These months are typically slower
for the restaurant with a reduction in sales from 15-20%.” Based on the stated considerations,
the patio acts as a substitute for seating inside the restaurant, and would not increase customer
demand above typical levels.
Parking within the PUD area, based on information provided by the applicant and a physical
count of the number of available parking spaces, is as follows:
Location / availability Number of spaces
South of Granite City 87 spaces
South of movie theater / Boston Market 148 spaces
McDonald’s 77 spaces
sub-total 312 spaces
North parking lot / Park Nicollet 414 spaces (available after 5:00 PM)
Total 726 spaces
The patio addition to Granite City would have a peak demand during the summer months after
5:00 PM, during which time the parking area to the north of the restaurant is available. The
proposed patio addition complies with the parking requirements set forth in the PUD approvals.
Landscaping
The proposed patio addition includes new landscaping to increase the level of screening between
the patio and Park Center Boulevard. The landscaping will include a low wall surrounding the
patio, which will match the building materials used on the principal structure. There are also 18
new large shrubs that will be planted to the west of the proposed wall.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
Summary:
The proposed patio addition complies with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and does
not impact the original intent or purpose of the PUD as originally. The parking provided on the
site is sufficient to accommodate all Granite City customers as well as patrons of the other
businesses within the PUD area.
Staff and Planning Commission Recommendation:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 16, 2011. No one was present to
speak at the hearing.
Staff and Planning Commission recommend approval of the Major Amendment to the Tower
Place PUD, subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to use of the patio, the landscaping plan shall be revised to reflect the recommendations
of the City’s Environmental Coordinator.
2. All necessary permits must be obtained.
3. Specifications for tree protection and erosion control fencing must be submitted and
approved by the City’s Environmental Coordinator. Required tree protection and erosion
control fencing must be installed prior to grading activities.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
St. Louis Park is a connected and engaged community.
Attachments: Resolution
Location Map
Project narrative (from May 2010)
Site Plan and related documents
Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Approved by: Nancy Deno Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
RESOLUTION NO. 11-_____
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 06-042 APPROVED ON
FEBRUARY 21, 2006 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 14:6-7 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK
ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED “O”
OFFICE, C-2 COMMERCIAL AND R-C HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE DISTRICTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF
EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD AND HIGHWAY 100
Amends and Restates Resolution 06-042
Major amendment to allow for expansion of outdoor patio
WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was
received on April 5, 1993 from the applicants, and
WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was mailed to all owners
of property within 350 feet of the subject property plus other affected property owners in the
vicinity, and
WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD Plan was published in the
St. Louis Park Sailor on May 5, 1993, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary PUD concept at the
meeting of May 5, 1993, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the meeting of May
17, 1993 and continued the hearing until June 2, 1993 and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary PUD
on a 6-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD at the meeting of
November 1, 1993, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD on a 6-
0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission
minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments
in the record of decision,
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 93-183 approving the PUD was approved by the City
Council on November 15, 1993; and
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 5
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
WHEREAS, an application for an amendment for a PUD was received on July 26, 1994,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits, and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 94-103 approving an amendment to the PUD was approved
by the City Council on August 1, 1994, and
WHEREAS, an application for an amendment for a PUD was received on November 22,
1994, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits, and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 94-180 approving an amendment to the PUD was approved
by the City Council on December 5, 1994, and
WHEREAS, on June 17, 2002, Frauenshuh Companies filed an application seeking a
major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow a change
in an approved use from a retail use to a restaurant use, and
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received
testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 6-1 recommended approval
of the major amendment to the PUD, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits, and
WHEREAS, on December 21, 2005, Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd. filed an
application seeking a minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower
Place to allow modifications to the exterior of the structure, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits,
WHEREAS, on December 21, 2005, Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd. filed an
application seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower
Place to allow structural alterations at 5500 Excelsior Blvd., and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing,
received testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 6-0 recommended
approval of the major amendment to the PUD, and
WHEREAS, on January 18, 2011, Granite City Food and Brewery filed an application
seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to
allow for the expansion of an outdoor patio at 5300 Excelsior Boulevard, and
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 6
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
WHEREAS, on February 16, 2011, the Planning Commission held a public hearing,
reviewed the application, and on a vote of 4-0 recommended approval of the major amendment
to the PUD,
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park:
Recitals
The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein and made part of this resolution.
Findings
1. Frauenshuh Companies has made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit
Development under Section 14:6-7 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the “O”
Office, C-2 Commercial and R-C High Density Multiple Family Residence Districts
located at the northeast quadrant of Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 100 for the legal
description as follows, to-wit:
Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 93-18-PUD) and the effect of the proposed Final PUD and
amendments thereto on the health, safety, or general welfare of the occupants of the
surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of
properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and
compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The City Council has determined that approval of a Final PUD and the proposed
amendments thereto will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the
community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious
traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property
values. The Council has determined that the proposed Final PUD and amendments
thereto are in harmony with the general provisions, purpose and intent of the City’s
Zoning Ordinance and its Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications
comply with the requirements of Section 14:6-7.2(E).
4. The contents of Planning Case File 93-18-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of
the public hearing and the record of decision for this case.
Conditions and Approval
A Final PUD at the location described in paragraph 1 of the above findings is approved based on
the recitals and findings set forth above, the Approved Final Plans, and subject to the following
conditions:
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 7
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
1. Approval of the roadway improvement plans submitted as part of the Indirect Source
Permit application by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Hennepin
County Department of Transportation.
2. Approval by the City and execution of a development agreement between the City and
Frauenshuh Companies which identifies responsibilities of each relating to the project.
3. Recording of the final plat of Tower Place by Hennepin County.
4. The Contract for Private Development between the Economic Development Authority
(EDA) and Frauenshuh Companies is incorporated herein by reference. City Council
intent is to implement both the Contract for Private Redevelopment and the development
agreement and give effect to all provisions of each, including but not limited to the
EDA’s right to review and approve Construction Plans as provided in Section 9.2 of said
Contract for Private Development.
5. The approval of this Final PUD applies only to those elements listed as Phase I
improvements on Exhibit A – Master Plan Phase I to be completed by Frauenshuh
Companies on Lots 6 and 7 and the right-of-way adjacent thereto up to the curb of the
adjacent road. This condition is subject to the limitation that the total square footage of
the retail and theater development shall not exceed the lesser of 47,200 square feet or the
square footage allocated to this development in the Indirect Source Permit as may be
amended from time to time.
6. The City reserves the right to require the applicant to install a pedestrian access from any
bus stop to be located on the north side of Excelsior Boulevard west of Park Nicollet
Boulevard to the development site.
7. Development of Lots 6-7 Tower Place and improvements on adjacent right-of-way up to
the curb of the adjacent road shall be in accordance with the following exhibits:
Exhibit A – Site Layout (Sheets C2.3)
(Amended by Condition No. 11 approved 8-19-02)
Exhibit B – Site Utilities (Sheets C3.3)
Exhibit C – Site Grading (Sheets C4.3)
Exhibit D – Site Planting (Sheet L2.3)
Exhibit E – Site Lighting (Sheet E1)
Exhibit F – Building Elevations (Sheets A2.00R, A.202R, A2.03R, A2.04R)
(Amended by Condition No. 11 approved 8-19-02)
The Site Layout (Exhibit A) is approved with the condition that vehicles leaving the site
from the driveway on Park Center Boulevard shall be prohibited from making left turns
to south bound Park Center Boulevard. The Development Agreement shall make
provision for on-going monitoring of the need for the left turn prohibition and removal of
the left turn prohibition if such monitoring indicates the prohibition is unnecessary.
The Site Layout is based on the assumption the driveway on Excelsior Boulevard will
allow both ingress to and egress from the site. The Floor Plans on Exhibit F are
illustrative in nature and are subject to modification without amending this resolution.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 8
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
(Amended by Condition No. 8 approved 8-1-94)
(Amended by Conditions 9 and 10 approved 12-5-94)
8. Condition number 7, Exhibit F is amended to delete Building Elevation Sheet A.202R
and replace it with Building Elevation Sheet A-2
(Amended by Condition No. 9 approved 12-5-94)
9. Condition number 8, Exhibit F is amended to delete Building Elevation Sheet A-2 and
replace it with Building Elevations Sheet A-11 dated November 10, 1994.
10. Condition number 7, Exhibits A through D, is amended by deleting sheets C2.3, C3.3,
C4.3 and L2.3 and replacing them with Sheets C2.1, C3.1, C4.1 and Planting Plan, all
dated November 16, 1994. These exhibits are modified by Exhibit G, McDonalds
Driveway Plan.
11. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 02-36-PUD) on August 19, 2002 to
incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow a change in 3,500 sq. ft. of tenant
space from retail to restaurant without intoxicating liquor (Chipotle) and add the
following conditions:
a. The site shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the official
exhibits (Exhibits A Site Layout and F Building Elevations shall be submitted), in
the form of an as-built survey with proposed changes shown and shall be revised
prior to signing the exhibits to meet the following conditions for the outdoor
seating area on the southwest corner of the theater/mixed use building:
1. The outdoor seating area must provide a 5 foot wide sidewalk that is kept
free of temporary and permanent obstruction. Such sidewalk must be 6
feet from and parallel to the building (or continue in a straight line from
the sidewalk to the east).
2. The outdoor seating area cannot be enclosed with a fence.
3. A maximum of two existing handicap parking stalls may be removed to
accommodate the outdoor seating area.
4. The size of outdoor seating area cannot be more than 10% of the indoor
restaurant area.
b. Official exhibits as revised per condition 11a. and updated to show as-built conditions
on the overall site must be signed by the applicant and owner prior to issuance of a
building permit. Such exhibits shall show the approved uses of this development to
include: 7,000 square feet as restaurant with intoxicating liquor, 3,400 sq. ft as
restaurants without intoxicating liquor and/or food service, retail/service, 3,800 sq. ft.
as restaurant with in-vehicle sales/service, and in the Theater/Mixed use building
26,000 sq. ft. for a theater, 900 sq. ft for retail/service, and 5,900 sq. ft for retail or
restaurant without intoxicating liquor.
c. Required building, plumbing, electrical and other required permits shall be obtained
from the City. Such permits may impose additional conditions.
d. All required improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the new restaurant without intoxicating liquor, including:
1. Interior improvements in accordance with permit approval.
2. Compliance with Accessibility Code requirements.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a) Page 9
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
3. Exterior exhaust chase must comply with the MN State Building Code.
e. Prior to installation of any new signs the applicant shall obtain sign permits.
f. The applicant is responsible for the installation of the on-site regulation signage as
recommended by SRF.
12. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 05-75-PUD) on February 6, 2006 to
incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow modifications to the exterior of the
building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions:
a. The exterior of the building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. shall be modified as shown
on Sheet A200 of the official exhibits.
b. Required permits for construction and installation of signs shall be obtained from
the City. Such permits may impose additional conditions.
c. Any modifications to the building footprint shall require a Major Amendment to
the Tower Place PUD.
13. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 05-76-PUD) on February 21, 2006 to
incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow structural alterations to the building at
5500 Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions:
a. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits.
b. No dining shall take place in the area planned for a brewery.
14. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 11-02-PUD) on March 7, 2011 to incorporate
all of the preceding conditions to allow for expansion of an outdoor patio at 5300
Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions:
a. Prior to use of the patio, the landscaping plan shall be revised to reflect the
recommendations of the City’s Environmental Coordinator.
b. All necessary permits must be obtained.
c. Specifications for tree protection and erosion control fencing must be submitted and
approved by the City’s Environmental Coordinator. Required tree protection and
erosion control fencing must be installed prior to grading activities.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 7, 2011
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
PARK CENTER BLVDEXCELSIOR BLVD TO NB HWY100 SHIGHWAY 100 SZoning Classifications
C1 - Neighborhood Commercial
C2 - General Commercial
IG - General Industrial
IP - Industrial Park
MX - Mixed-Use
O - Office
R1 - Single Family
R2 - Single Family
R3 - Two Family
R4 - Multiple Family
RC - High Density
Granite City Food & Brewery (Case No. 05-76-PUD)Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD
0 7035 Feet
$
February 15, 2006
3X
C-2
C-2
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a)
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard Page 10
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a)
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard Page 11
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a)
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard Page 12
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a)
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard Page 13
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a)
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard Page 14
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4a)
Subject: Major Amendment to Tower Place PUD (Granite City) 5300 Excelsior Boulevard Page 15
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4b
Police Advisory Commission
Minutes – January 5, 2011
Aquila Room, City Hall
I. Call to Order
Chair Widmer called the meeting to order at 7:00.
Commissioners Present: Matthew Flory, Cindy Hoffman, Ken Huiras, Jason Kley, Kimberly
Mayes, Rashmi Seneviratne, Jim Smith and Hans Widmer
Staff Present: Lieutenant Harcey and Ms. Stegora-Peterson.
II. Approval of Minutes
Motion to approve the November 3, 2010 minutes was made by Commissioner Smith, seconded
by Commissioner Huiras. The minutes were approved.
III. Elections
Motion to nominate Jim Smith as Chair was made by Commissioner Huiras, seconded by
Commissioner Mayes. The motion was approved.
Motion to nominate Hans Widmer as Vice Chair was made by Commissioner Smith, seconded
by Commissioner Huiras. The motion was approved.
IV. HRC Update
Commissioner Seneviratne reported she was trying to contact ELL staff to coordinate training
similar to the Police Academy for immigrant populations. Lt. Harcey noted he would help make
contact.
Commissioner Seneviratne stated the HRC chose two recipients for the annual Human Rights
Award, which would be presented at the next City Council meeting.
Lt. Harcey indicated there is grant money available through the county that supports community
liaisons to partner with Police Departments and provide community outreach to immigrant
populations. They were working with Hopkins to do a joint venture to get a shared liaison. This
would also potentially include cultural diversity training for Police officers.
V. PSA Video Project Update
Lt. Harcey stated he didn’t get to work with Mr. Dunlap on this due to the department workload.
He has an outline for Community Policing and they have filmed “A Day in the Life.” An outline
is being developed for a Cornerstone domestic violence PSA. They can expand the bike
information to include changes with railroad crossings and LRT.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Subject: Police Advisory Commission Minutes January 5, 2011
Other suggestions included: The Wooddale crossing is now a pedestrian crosswalk and the
crossing has changed; Dog ordinance (leashing and dog parks) – this information could be put on
the web site.
VI. Update on Cornerstone and Domestic Violence Education
Lt. Harcey noted that Commissioner Cushman has been working on this information with Jamie
Zwilling and Cornerstone staff and have come up with a Domestic Violence Education
Communication Plan (handout). This included a goal, audience, methods, potential locations, a
message development, tools and a timeline. They would like Commissioner feedback. It was
suggested churches, libraries, the Rec. Center, Fire stations and the nature center be added to the
locations and information be included about teen and dating abuse.
Lt. Harcey stated PAC could provide information at community events.
VII. 2010 Year End Report to City Council
Lt. Harcey stated the Annual report would go before City Council at a meeting in February. The
Council will review the report and decide if they would like to meet with Commissioners.
VIII. Old/New Business
Lt. Harcey noted dates hadn’t been scheduled for the next Police Academy. The Department has
been spending a lot of time working on the homicide that occurred at Lakeland and have been
working with the owner and the Inspections Department. The budget had been approved. An
officer who had retired in November has just replaced, but they needed to hire a CSO Cadet.
IX. Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 7:50 PM.
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4c
OFFICIAL MINUTES
ST. LOUIS PARK TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
MEETING OF DECEMBER 9, 2010
ST. LOUIS PARK COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bruce Browning, Dale Hartman, Toby Keeler, Mike Mulligan,
Rolf Peterson, Jenna Sheldon (youth member) and Bill Theobald
MEMBERS ABSENT: Rick Dworsky
STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator; John McHugh, Community
TV Coordinator
OTHERS PRESENT:
1. Call to Order
Chair Browning called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM.
2. Roll Call
Present at roll call were Commissioners Browning, Hartman, Keeler, Mulligan, Peterson,
Sheldon and Theobald.
3. Approval of Minutes
A. Telecommunications Commission minutes: August 19, 2010
It was moved by Commissioner Keeler, seconded by Commissioner Hartman, to approve
the minutes of August 19, 2010, without changes.
The motion passed 7-0.
B. Approve Telecommunications Commission Notes: October 21, 2010 (no
quorum at this meeting)
It was moved by Commissioner Keeler, seconded by Commissioner Mulligan, to approve
the notes of October 21, 2010, without changes.
The motion passed 7-0.
4. Adoption of Agenda
It was moved by Commissioner Mulligan, seconded by Commissioner Keeler, to approve
the agenda.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Public Comment - None
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes December 9, 2010
6. New Business
A. Comcast presentation on channel line up changes
Mr. Dunlap said Comcast was now calling their services XFINITY and showed a
PowerPoint presentation listing the many new HD channels. There were no changes to
the price list for January. The information is available on the City website in the Cable
TV information section.
B. Council request for Telecommunications Commission subcommittee to
report on the future of cable TV
Mr. Dunlap stated last years budget discussions led to this Council request for a
subcommittee to study the future of cable TV and report back to the Commission and
City Council. Previously the City projected franchise fee revenues to grow at 3%, but
because revenues have slowed down the last few quarters, projections have been revised
to 1% growth.
Video services aren’t delivered the same way as they were 10 years ago and there has
been many changes in technology. The end of the franchise is in 2021, and it’s possible
there won’t be another franchise agreement after that, so the City Council wants to plan
ahead. Right now the City is in a strong financial situation, and if things change, what is
the best way to continue to deliver video services to serve the community? The sub
committee would be at least two Telecomm members and two staff, with Jamie Zwilling
being the lead on this, and will report to the Telecommunications Commission. The
Commission and subcommittee would decide the specifics to study including questions
and outcomes to be explored. Keeler and Browning volunteered to be on the sub
committee. Commissioner Keeler suggested Youth Member Sheldon participate and
provide the “new generation” insight, and she said she’d like to be part of this.
C. Grand Stadium Agreement for High School Sports Sectionals coverage
Chair Browning said that he and Commissioner Keeler hadn’t received the email
background attachment so he’d like to look at this in greater detail before drawing any
conclusions. But he recommended some general information from staff and how many
people are affected.
Mr. Dunlap indicated Grand Stadium is a subsidiary of Hubbard Broadcasting and
Channel 45 which has the exclusive rights to cover high school sports tournaments. Park
TV covers high school sectional games, and it’s possible that a worst case scenario is that
Park TV would be prohibited from covering sectional games without a signed agreement
with Hubbard. The signed agreement also means Park TV would provide a DVD of
game coverage to Grand Stadium, which would use their portal on the internet to
publicize and sell copies, and the City would get a percentage of sales. Mr. Dunlap said
he only knew of one organization that had signed the agreement to this point, and some
people had voiced some concerns. The purpose for raising the issue was to see if the
Commission chooses to become involved in the discussion or to have staff resolve this.
Commissioner Mulligan asked if the City monetizes the events they cover? Mr. Dunlap
said the DVD’s sell for $15 each and that high school sports was a popular request. Mr.
McHugh said DVD sales were between $2,000 and $4,000 in revenue per year.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4c) Page 3
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes December 9, 2010
Commissioner Mulligan asked if it was a new initiative or contract, and Mr. Dunlap said
he thought it was, between a few months or one year. Commissioner Keeler said that they
wouldn’t have the resources to cover all the sectional events which is probably why they
were recruiting partners. Chair Browning asked if a representative from Hubbard could
be available at the next meeting to answer questions, and Mr. Dunlap said he would try to
arrange that for the February meeting.
Commissioner Peterson said that North Metro had concerns about the Grand Stadium
agreement and that it might violate their franchise agreement. Has staff submitted the
information to the City Attorney yet? Mr. Dunlap said it hadn’t been, but based on his
own knowledge of the franchise there wouldn’t be a conflict.
The Commission wanted more information before making a decision, and Commissioner
Theobald suggested that the City legal folks check the agreement.
Mr. McHugh said it was a 1 year agreement and it’s unclear if they continue to sell the
recordings after 1 year.
D. Draft Annual Report for 2010
Mr. Dunlap indicated the report was missing the tally of Comcast complaints, so that will
be updated before being sent to Council. The practice for the last few years has been to
submit the written report to the Council at one meeting, and meet with the Council at a
later date to discuss the Annual report and work plan.
Mr. McHugh said the Lenox Wi-Fi hot spot has been completed, so to revise that
reference.
E. Set meetings for 2011
2011 meetings are as follows: February 10, April 7, July 14, October 6 and December 8th.
F. Draft Work Plan for 2011
Mr. Dunlap stated the commission could suggest additions. Suggestions included Grand
Stadium in February and new Clear G4 service for in April.
G. Elect Chair & Vice Chair, effective next meeting
Commissioner Keeler made a motion to nominate Mike Mulligan as Chair,
Commissioner Theobald seconded. The motion passed 7-0.
Commissioner Mulligan made a motion to nominate Rolf Peterson as Vice Chair,
Commissioner Keeler seconded. The motion passed 7-0.
7. Unfinished Business
A Long term fiber infrastructure planning update
Commissioner Keeler said Clint Pires put together a proposal that was recently presented
to the City Council; the first meeting is expected in January.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4c) Page 4
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes December 9, 2010
Mr. McHugh said they will start putting together an RFP to hire a consultant to guide the
process. They have 28 miles of infrastructure and need to determine where to add more
and why. There is a $50,000 limit to come up with a plan for the community. He expects
the RFP to be done in the first half of the year, depending on how the process goes.
Commissioner Browning said the City of Minneapolis is running a pilot project with USI
wireless to run a direct fiber connection to some homes and to offer 30 megabit/second
service for $24.95/month. The also offer higher speeds for higher prices, and also may
offer television service. This information comes from a colleague of Commissioner
Browning’s who lives in Edina, and it’s not clear if the pilot will be expanded.
Commissioner Browning also said that Google was expected to make their announcement
soon about their fiber project.
8. Reports
A. Complaints
Commissioner Peterson was surprised there was only one complaint about a recent issue
with internet service being down.
Commissioner Hartman indicated he had a recent billing issue regarding a change in
phone service.
Commissioner Browning stated there were not many complaints and felt Comcast was
doing a good job resolving issues.
Commissioner Theobald asked how many St. Louis Park residents were Comcast
customers? Mr. Dunlap replied approximately 13,000 had cable TV. There was an
average of 75-100 complaints annually. Commissioner Keeler said that represents half of
a percent of customers that complain to the City.
9. Communication from the Chair
Commissioner Browning asked Commissioner Mulligan about his experience with the
Sprint 4G Max, which was launched in October. Commissioner Mulligan said Sprint
partnered with Clear to launch WiMax services in the Twin Cities, that he had bought a
new phone in July that received a WiMax signal in Richfield in August. He said the
download speeds were much faster in 4G than 3G, and that would be very advantageous
if he was to do a lot of downloading. He said his phones battery life is an issue while
downloading, and that there is an issue with consistency of the signal. There is no 4G
service in his neighborhood by Browndale/Minikahda Vista and he wouldn’t pay a
premium price for the service at the moment. He said that Sprint’s service is WiMax and
Verizon’s service is LTE, so there are multiple technologies being offered.
Commissioner Browning said that was the same as the experience of others he’d talked to
with 4G devices, that the service was still too new on both the providers to be reliable.
He expects service to improve as they fill out the towers and antennas. He also said it’s
difficult to know what’s being offered, that even the providers don’t know what services
are being sold.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4c) Page 5
Subject: Telecommunications Commission Minutes December 9, 2010
10. Communications from City Staff
Commissioner Keeler asked if there would be a travel budget for Commissioners to
attend the 2011 NATOA conference? Mr. Dunlap replied he didn’t have that information
yet and would know in May.
Commissioner Browning mentioned that several of the Commissioners had attended
another worthwhile MACTA conference locally, and that he’d learned a lot at the
conference. He also said it was an honor to be chair during this busy year, and that next
year looks busier still.
11. Adjournment
Commissioner Mulligan made a motion, Commission Peterson seconded to adjourn at
8:03. The motion passed.
Respectfully submitted by:
Amy L. Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4d
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:
Vendor Claims.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to accept for filing Vendor Claims for the period February 12, 2011 through February 25,
2011.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND:
The Finance Department prepares this report on a monthly basis for Council’s review.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Vendor Claims
Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
885.73FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES3M
885.73
316.80SKATEBOARD PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES3RD LAIR SKATEPARK
316.80
143.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESABRAKADOODLE
143.00
499.35PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYACTION FLEET INC
125.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
624.35
847.25WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESADVANCED ENGINEERING & ENVIRON
847.25
30,846.10REILLY BUDGET GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESAECOM INC
30,846.10
72.16POLICE G & A TELEPHONEAMERICAN MESSAGING
72.16
516.12PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS
516.12
80.16GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER
137.56PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
89.54PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
26.71ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
97.90VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
61.82WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
61.82SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
10.30STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
565.81
643.04SUPPORT SERVICES G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESANCHOR PAPER CO
643.04
1,069.93GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYAPACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA
779.76BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,849.69
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 2
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
168.09ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESARAMARK UNIFORM CORP ACCTS
168.09
78.20REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESARGUEDAS, MARINO & NANCY
78.20
170.95PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAUTO ELECTRIC OF BLOOMINGTON I
170.95
90.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNTBALDWIN & MATTSON INC
90.00
897.00HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESBARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD
897.00
638.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESBARR ENGINEERING CO
1,079.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
1,717.50
590.00WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESBATH CARE
590.00
51.74WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESBATTERIES PLUS
51.74
1,400.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A RENTAL BUILDINGSBELT LINE PROPERTIES INC
1,400.00
124.44ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARBIRNO, RICK
124.44
328.00ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESBOLTON & MENK INC
328.00
73.41PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYBOYER TRUCK PARTS
73.41
3,163.50ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICESBRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION
150.00GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
3,313.50
10.00WARMING HOUSES PROGRAM REVENUEBREZNIAK, DIANE
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 3
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
3Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
10.00
6.40-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSBROWNELLS, INC
99.46ERUOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
93.06
55.00ERUTRAININGCAMP RIPLEY MESS FUND
55.00
7,929.44ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICESCAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC
317.50STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
8,246.94
212.68IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE
212.68
5,164.26TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTCDW GOVERNMENT INC
5,164.26
5,000.00TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICECEDAR RIVER HORSE LOGGING & WO
5,000.00
7,800.00LIVE WHERE YOU WORK PRGM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT
7,800.00
6,609.90FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY
2,618.39PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS
294.71WESTWOOD G & A HEATING GAS
298.72NATURALIST PROGRAMMER HEATING GAS
355.90WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
7,859.48WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
393.29REILLY G & A HEATING GAS
380.18SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS
18,810.57
16,893.75FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN
9,378.21ENTERPRISE G & A HEATING GAS
26,271.96
640.00PLUMBING MTCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICECERTIFIED PLUMBING INC
640.00
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 4
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
4Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
143.41FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESCINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY
143.41
64.59-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK
738.94HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES
300.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION
756.99HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING
372.46COMM & MARKETING G & A TELEPHONE
184.25POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
5.00POLICE G & A POSTAGE
1.95POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
704.07DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
31.75OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
50.22OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
63.25OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS
581.35OPERATIONSEQUIPMENT PARTS
51.03OPERATIONSBLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
3,536.45OPERATIONSTRAINING
22.40WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
332.95WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
618.91GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
585.00FRANCHISE ADMINISTRATION SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
8,872.38
674.00CONCESSIONS/HOCKEY ASSOC CONCESSION SUPPLIESCOCA-COLA BOTTLING CO
674.00
177.65INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOLBORN, CHRISTINE
177.65
218.30EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSCOLLECTION SERVICES CENTER
218.30
712.13ENGINEERING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION
268.98TRAININGOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
288.17CE MATERIALS TESTING IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
1,269.28
248.50PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDICONSTRUCTION BULLETIN
248.50
8,158.89POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 5
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
5Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
8,158.89
4,201.95TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTCORONA SOLUTIONS
4,201.95
1,800.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENTCUES INC
1,800.00
2,790.44WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECUMMINS NPOWER LLC
2,731.53SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,352.13STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
6,874.10
299.65ENTERPRISE G & A ADVERTISINGDEX MEDIA EAST LLC
299.65
2,891.46SUPPORT SERVICES G&A POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC
2,891.46
15.00ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAININGDOMEIER, AMY
15.00
36,400.00SPEC ASSMT CONSTRUCTION CURRENTDUNN, THOMAS & CATHERINE
36,400.00
615.18WIRING REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESEGAN COMPANIES INC
488.00SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,103.18
2,000.002003 GO IMPROVE DEBT SERV G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESEHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC
2,000.00
520.73SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSELECTRIC PUMP INC
3,807.19SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE
4,327.92
126.00WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESERICKSONS SEWER SERVICE INC
126.00
33,990.57SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS RECYCLING SERVICEEUREKA RECYCLING
33,990.57
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 6
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
6Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
14.27-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSEVIDENT CRIME SCENE PRODUCTS
221.77POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
207.50
183.30PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO
183.30
88.12SEWER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESFASTENAL COMPANY
88.12
121.15WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSFERGUSON WATERWORKS
121.15
71.14HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENTFISCHER, DEBBIE
71.14
125.00OPERATIONSTRAININGFITOAM
125.00
12,228.27TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTFRANZ REPROGRAPHICS
12,228.27
10,000.00NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESFRIENDS OF THE ARTS
10,000.00
197.02ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESG S DIRECT
197.02
469.38GARAGE MTCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEGARAGE DOOR STORE
469.38
1,951.22ARENA MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEGARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC
1,951.22
132.38GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEGLASS DOCTOR
132.38
4,362.06EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S LONG TERM CARE INSURGLTC PREMIUM PAYMENTS
4,362.06
147.90WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC
147.90
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 7
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
7Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
311.78GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESGRAINGER INC, WW
311.78
1,686.59SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGRANITE LEDGE ELECTRICAL CONTR
1,686.59
600.00IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESGREEN, HOWARD R COMPANY
600.00
102.13DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESGRONSKI, PAM
102.13
538.64WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESHACH CO
538.64
837.50BROOMBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHAMILTON, MIKE
837.50
2,723.29WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESHAWKINS INC
150.21WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
2,873.50
167.00OPERATIONSGENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESHEALTHPARTNERS
167.00
100.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENDERSON, TRACY
100.00
534.38IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICESHENNEPIN COUNTY INFO TECH
534.38
1,838.20POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF
1,838.20
36.00ASSESSING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSHENNEPIN COUNTY TAXPAYER SERVI
36.00
29,209.66TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTHEWLETT-PACKARD CO
29,209.66
222.12GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 8
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
8Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
163.33PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
108.50INVASIVE PLANT MGMT/RESTORATIO GENERAL SUPPLIES
292.84TREE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS
84.05WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
7.90SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
13.85SEWER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES
892.59
330.65VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESHOTSY EQUIPMENT OF MN
330.65
11,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWHOWARD, WILLIE
11,000.00
1,200.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWHRDLICKA, JASON
1,200.00
251.15WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLSHSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS
251.15SEWER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS
502.30
498.32PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYI-STATE TRUCK CENTER
498.32
1,601.75EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESI.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49
1,601.75
75.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTI/O SOLUTIONS INC
75.00
100.00INSPECTIONS G & A LICENSESICC
100.00
2,309.90CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESIMPLEX.NET INC
2,309.90
296.27PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYINVER GROVE FORD
296.27
10.00HUMAN RESOURCES SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATIPMA - MINNESOTA CHAPTER ADMIN
10.00
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 9
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
9Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
64.11POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESIRON MOUNTAIN
64.11
6,989.63PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYJEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC
449.63-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
6,540.00
8.64ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLSJERRY'S MIRACLE MILE
13.26WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
21.90
104.71PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYJOHN HENRY FOSTER MN
104.71
291.41WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESJRK SEED & SURG SUPPLY
291.41
276.92EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSKELLER, JASMINE Z
276.92
5,995.81PPL LOUISIANA COURT LEGAL SERVICESKENNEDY & GRAVEN
5,995.81
18,061.50Federal EECBG Grant Project IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIKILLMER ELECTRIC CO INC
18,061.50
150.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKINDLER, KIM
150.00
133.08BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESKRUGE-AIR INC
129.00BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
262.08
144.82PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYLANO EQUIPMENT INC
144.82
36.00HOUSING REHAB G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARLARSEN, KATHY
36.00
162.50GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLARSON, KARLA
162.50
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 10
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
10Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
200.00FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATLARSONALLEN
200.00
2,226.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESLAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES
2,226.00
390.64GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESLAWSON PRODUCTS INC
390.64
3,506.26UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSLEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE
3,506.26
381.20PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDILEGEND TECHNICAL SERVICES
381.20
77.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSLENSS, JOHN
77.00
168.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLENTNER, LAURA
168.00
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWLESER, CHRISTOPH
1,000.00
1,400.79PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYLITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC
1,400.79
355.57POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICELOFFLER COMPANIES
355.57
600.00NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES COMPUTER SERVICESLOGIS
600.00
470.40Justice Assistance Grant -2005 SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATLUSE, JOHN
470.40
126.22ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARLYNCH, DEBRA
126.22
185.00ASSESSING G & A TRAININGMAAO
450.00ASSESSING G & A LICENSES
635.00
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 11
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
11Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
13,806.55ACCIDENT REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMACQUEEN EQUIP CO
13,806.55
545.60FITNESS PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMALONE, DANIEL
545.60
11,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWMCGOVERN, JOHN
11,000.00
148.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMCGREGOR-HANNAH, MAREN
148.00
65.70PUBLIC WORKS G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARMERKLEY, SCOTT
65.70
2,842.08SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSMETHODIST HOSPITAL
2,842.08
426.43VOLLEYBALLGENERAL SUPPLIESMETRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY
426.43
424.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMETRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS
424.00
5,900.84IT G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENTMID AMERICA BUSINESS SYSTEMS
5,900.84
1,020.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMIDWEST TESTING LLC
1,020.00
31.90WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTSMILWAUKEE ELECTRIC TOOL CORP
31.90
337.20PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT
337.20
58.78POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESMINNESOTA CHIEFS POLICE ASSOC
58.78
1,224.08EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSMINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CT
1,224.08
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 12
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
12Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
240.00FINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSMINNESOTA GFOA
240.00
40.00ENVIRONMENTAL G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSMINNESOTA SOCIETY OF ARBORICUL
40.00
2,097.56PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESMISTER CAR WASH
2,097.56
70.00PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSMSSA
70.00
265.00REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMVTL LABORATORIES
265.00
4.37OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIESNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)
81.95SANDING/SALTING EQUIPMENT PARTS
388.44PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORY
366.29GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
19.11SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS
860.16
8.91VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESNEP CORP
8.91
55.52HOCKEYGENERAL SUPPLIESNEW HOPE, CITY OF
55.52
4,818.43TASK FORCE GRANTS - STATENORTHWEST METRO DRUG TASK FORC
4,818.43
204.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTNORTHWORKS OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
204.00
150.00ERUSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSNTOA
150.00
144.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESOBERSTAR, KATIE
144.00
200.64TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTOCE
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 13
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
13Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
200.64
46.62HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
13.63GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES
24.68OPERATIONSEQUIPMENT PARTS
246.23ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
43.17PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
3.41HOUSING REHAB G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
377.74
85.50OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESON SITE SANITATION
85.50
1,329.53TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEOSTVIG TREE INC
2,432.48TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
3,762.01
165.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPAPP, MELISSA
165.00
471.69COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGPERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC
471.69
112.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPETERSEN, CHRISTA
112.00
99.12WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESPETTY CASH - WWNC
17.60WESTWOOD G & A POSTAGE
10.35WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR
127.07
185.00POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSPOLICE EXECUTIVE RESEARCH FORU
185.00
939.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPOLK, MARLA
939.00
585.00POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEPOSTMASTER
585.00
228.03WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGEPOSTMASTER - PERMIT #603
228.03SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 14
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
14Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
228.03SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
228.03STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
912.12
13,826.42TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEPRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE
2,968.99TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE
16,795.41
1,358.14WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESPROGRESSIVE CONSULTING ENGINEE
1,358.14
2,047.92BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BUILDING MTCE SERVICEPUMP & METER SERVICE
2,047.92
175.79IT G & A TELEPHONEQWEST
143.08COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONE
318.87
77.89WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGERAPID GRAPHICS & MAILING
77.88SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
77.88SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
77.88STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
311.53
47.35-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSRHOMAR INDUSTRIES INC
736.13GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
688.78
882.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRUDDY, WILLIAM
882.00
69.95GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESAFELITE FULFILLMENT INC
69.95
35.00OPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSSAM'S CLUB
210.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
163.59WARMING HOUSES GENERAL SUPPLIES
105.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
27.12WESTWOOD G & A CONCESSION SUPPLIES
35.00WESTWOOD G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
68.63VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
644.34
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 15
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
15Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
255.86HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITIONSCHAAKE COMPANY, AJ
255.86
100.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHMIDT, KELLIE
100.00
721.60FITNESS PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHRAMM, HOLLY
721.60
240.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHUMACHER, REBECCA
240.00
400.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHUMANN, MATTHEW
400.00
308.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSEH
308.00
245.71PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESSEVEN CORNERS ACE HDWE
245.71
248.50PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISGC HORIZON LLC
248.50
7,843.04PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISHAW/STEWART LUMBER CO
7,843.04
1,401.65EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESSLP ASSOC OF FIREFIGHTERS #993
1,401.65
285.00PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSNOW CLEARING SERVICE
285.00
47,194.69TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTSOFTWARE HOUSE INTERNATIONAL
47,194.69
150.00ERUSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSSOTA
150.00
2,829.34IT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONSSPRINT
2,829.34
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 16
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
16Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
10.47ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESSPS COMPANIES INC
200.65PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES
30.59WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
241.71
1,171.83ESCROWSGENERALSRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
1,171.83
97.40INSPECTIONS G & A MECHANICALSTEINKRAUS PLUMBING INC
97.40
249.93ERUOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSTREICHER'S
249.93
91.46PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSUBURBAN GM PARTS
91.46
54.38FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARSWANSON, BRIAN
54.38
1,537.50BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSWEELEY, DAVID
1,537.50
24.06-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSTASER INTERNATIONAL
374.06POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
350.00
43.86ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTELELANGUAGE INC
43.86
74.56BRICK HOUSE (1324)BUILDING MTCE SERVICETERMINIX INT
74.55WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
149.11
45.96ADMINISTRATION G & A LONG TERM DISABILITYTHE HARTFORD - PRIORITY ACCOUN
54.49HUMAN RESOURCES LONG TERM DISABILITY
16.55COMM & MARKETING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
42.64IT G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
35.66ASSESSING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
67.80FINANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
115.75COMM DEV G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 17
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
17Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
123.78POLICE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
78.55OPERATIONSLONG TERM DISABILITY
59.11INSPECTIONS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
44.59PUBLIC WORKS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
58.53ENGINEERING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
20.94PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
70.58ORGANIZED REC G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
20.94PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
17.46ENVIRONMENTAL G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
17.46WESTWOOD G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
18.46REC CENTER/AQUATIC PARK SAL LONG TERM DISABILITY
17.96VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY
16.97HOUSING REHAB G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY
20.94WATER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY
1,998.91EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY
2,964.03
220.00ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL
220.00
1,467.14PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTRI STATE BOBCAT
1,467.14
9,310.32SNOW PLOWING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTWIN CITY OUTDOOR SERVICES INC
9,310.32
60.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATTWIN WEST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
60.00
585.80ELECTRICAL SYSTEM MTCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEUHL CO INC
585.80
362.59POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESUNIFORMS UNLIMITED (PD)
3,323.28POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
3,685.87
257.22GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEUNITED STATES TREASURY
257.22
211.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA
211.00
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 18
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
18Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
245.00WATER UTILITY G&A TRAININGUNIVERSITY ENTERPRISES
245.00
14.30RELAMPINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESUPS STORE
14.30
3.89-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSUSI EDUCATION & GOVERNMENT SAL
60.43ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
56.54
84.83OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESVALLEY NATIONAL GASES WV LLC
17.56GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES
25.52SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
127.91
3,558.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEVALLEY-RICH CO INC
3,558.00
556.95PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESVIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY
556.95
2,239.73COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL RADIO COMMUNICATIONSWASHINGTON COUNTY
2,239.73
1,311.13PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICEWASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN
3,327.07SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS MOTOR FUELS
58,791.76SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
24,513.96SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE
26,817.75SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
947.34SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE
115,709.01
937.72WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEWATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC
937.72
262.53CONCESSIONS/HOCKEY ASSOC CONCESSION SUPPLIESWATSON CO INC
262.53
183.00REILLY G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSWEF MEMBERSHIP
183.00
500.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWELDON, DAN
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 19
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
19Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
500.00
120.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATWOODBURY, CITY OF
120.00
365.00ENTERPRISE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSWORLD WATERPARK ASSOC
365.00
22.68OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY
30,101.69PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
4,968.85PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
54.75BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE
34.54WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE
315.51WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE
30,066.16WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
2,003.81REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE
3,663.80SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
1,712.24STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE
72,944.03
21,221.97PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYYOCUM OIL CO INC
21,221.97
42.74PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESZACKS INC
293.13VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SMALL TOOLS
335.87
22.83PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESZEE MEDICAL SERVICE
22.83PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
22.82VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
22.82WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
91.30
32.31WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESZEMBRYKI, MARK
32.31
408.01GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEZIEGLER INC
408.01
67.91VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESZIP PRINTING
67.91
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 20
2/28/2011CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 8:58:13R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
20Page -Council Check Summary
2/25/2011 -2/12/2011
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
Report Totals 746,768.52
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4d)
Subject: Vendor Claims Page 21
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 4e
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
February 16, 2011 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Ford (youth member), Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Robert Kramer, Carl Robertson, Larry Shapiro
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynne Carper, Dennis Morris, Richard Person
STAFF PRESENT: Adam Fulton, Meg McMonigal, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
Commissioner Robertson, serving as chair, called the meeting to order.
2. Approval of Minutes of December 15, 2010 and February 2, 2011
Commissioner Kramer moved approval of the minutes of December 15, 2010 and
February 2, 2011. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion, and the motion passed
on a vote of 4-0.
3. Hearings
A. Major amendment to PUD for outdoor patio addition
Location: 5300 Excelsior Boulevard
Applicant: Granite City Food and Brewery
Case No.: 11-02-PUD
Adam Fulton, Planner, presented the staff report. He explained that a major amendment
to the Tower Place Planned Unit Development (PUD) is required because the proposed
outdoor patio changes the underlying parking requirements for the PUD.
Mr. Fulton reviewed the parking requirement. The existing restaurant has an overall
parking requirement of 150 spaces. The 1200 square foot patio addition will add to this
requirement; though the Zoning Ordinance exempts 500 square feet of the patio from the
parking requirement. The additional 700 square feet increased the parking requirement by
12 spaces. Mr. Fulton explained that the parking provided on-site, paired with the shared
parking available to the north of the restaurant, provides sufficient parking for all Granite
City customers as well as customers of other businesses in the PUD. He added that the
patio acts as a substitute for seating inside the restaurant, and would not increase the
demand for parking.
Mr. Fulton stated that staff recommends approval of the request subject to the following
conditions: 1) Prior to City Council review, the landscaping plan shall be revised to
reflect the recommendations of the City’s Environmental Coordinator; 2) All necessary
permits must be obtained; and 3) Specifications for tree protection and erosion control
fencing must be submitted and approved by the City’s Environmental Coordinator.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Subject: Planning Commission Minutes February 16, 2011
Required tree protection and erosion control fencing must be installed prior to grading
activities.
Commissioner Kramer stated that the request had previously been discussed by the
Commission at a study session. He said the request is very straightforward and low
impact.
Commissioner Robertson opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to
speak, Commissioner Robertson closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Kramer made a motion recommending approval. Commissioner Shapiro
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
4. Other Business
A. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair
Commissioner Shapiro nominated Commissioner Kramer for Chair.
Commissioner Kramer nominated Claudia Johnston-Madison for Chair. He said
he would accept the nomination for Vice-Chair. The motion nominating
Claudia Johnston-Madison for Chair and Robert Kramer for Vice Chair was
seconded by Commissioner Shapiro, and passed on a vote of 4-0.
B. Affordable Housing
Commissioner Robertson acknowledged the report which was provided to answer
questions which were raised about affordability housing at the Feb. 2nd study
session.
C. Planning Commission Annual Report
Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, stated the report is for
Commissioner’s review. She said it is missing the work plan for the coming year
which will be emailed to the Commission. She spoke about applications
expected in 2011.
Ms. McMonigal said that the Plan by Neighborhood section of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan has been completed. It will need to be formally adopted
into the Comprehensive Plan.
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:12 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 5a
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other: Boards and Commissions
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to appoint citizen representatives to serve on the Human Rights Commission or the
Police Advisory Commission to fill vacancies.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to appoint Citizen Representatives to the Human Rights Commission or
the Police Advisory Commission?
BACKGROUND:
The City Council interviewed applicants on February 14, February 22, and March 7, 2011 to fill
vacancies on the Human Rights Commission and the Police Advisory Commission. After the
interviews, Council discussed the candidate and appointment considerations.
Current Board & Commission Vacancies are as follows:
Commission Vacancies Terms
• Human Rights Commission 5 3 year
Youth Commissioner 1 1 year
• Police Advisory Commission 2 3 year
Youth Commissioner 1 1 year
• Charter Commission
(appointed by Judge)
1 4 year
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Appointing diverse citizen representatives who volunteer as commissioners to the various Boards
and Commissions assures St. Louis Park is consistent with the Council’s Strategic Direction of
being a connected and engaged community.
Prepared by: Kris Luedke, Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Nancy Deno Gohman, Deputy City Manager/Hr Director
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 6a
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:
Public Hearing - Liquor License – Soprano’s Restaurant.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve application from Soprano’s Restaurant, LLC
dba Soprano’s Restaurant for an on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor license to be located at
5331 West 16th Street with the license term through March 1, 2012.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to approve the liquor license for Soprano’s Restaurant?
BACKGROUND:
The City received an application from Soprano’s Restaurant, LLC, Inc for an on-sale
intoxicating liquor and Sunday sales license. The establishment plans to open in mid March. It
will be located at 5331 West 16th Street in the Shops at West End. The premises will consist of
approximately 7,760 square feet with 190 seats inside and 30 outdoor patio seating. Soprano’s
Restaurant describes itself as the next generation of Italian inspired restaurant that combines a
traditional Italian family supper with a hip, modern energy.
Soprano’s Restaurant is owned by: Mr. Kamran Talebi and Mr. Keyvan Talebi. Mr. David
Sincebaugh will be the on-site manager. Soprano’s will be the second restaurant opened within
the West End area for Mr. Talebi and Mr. Talebi. The first restaurant is Crave.
The Police Department has conducted a full investigation and has found nothing that would
warrant denial of the license. The application and police report are on file in the City Clerk’s
office should Council members wish to review the information. The required public hearing
legal notice was published in the Sun Sailor Newspaper on February 24, 2011.
Should Council approve the liquor license no actual license is issued until all required
compliance is met with City Inspections Department and the State Alcohol and Gambling
Enforcement Division.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The investigation fee for a new applicant is $500. The yearly license fee is $8,500 for on-sale
intoxicating liquor license and $200 for Sunday liquor license (pro-rated).
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Kris Luedke, Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Nancy Deno Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 8a
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:
Fire Stations - Approval of Plans and Specifications, and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting this report, establishing and ordering Improvement
Project Nos. 20083001 and 20083002, approving plans and specifications, and authorizing
advertisement for bids for two new fire stations.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to continue to move forward with this project?
BACKGROUND:
The two existing fire stations were built in the 1960s. Both fire stations have extensive building
and operational deficiencies. This project has been in the City’s capital plans for several years.
The planned improvements include, but are not limited to:
• Demolition and removal of the existing two fire stations.
• The new Fire Station No. 1 building will be 30,695 square feet in area and two stories
tall. The building will include Fire Department administration offices, station
administration, training room, kitchen/dayroom, fitness room, locker rooms, hose tower,
and 8 apparatus bays of varying depths.
• The new Fire Station No. 2 will be 16,760 square feet in area and one-story tall. The
building will include station administration, fitness room, locker rooms,
kitchen/dayroom, and 4 apparatus bays.
• Construction also includes associated grading, retaining walls, driveways, parking lots,
landscaping, irrigation, and storm water management.
• Construction of the new fire station buildings will consist of site work, site utilities,
building excavation, concrete, precast, masonry, steel, carpentry, roofing, metal wall
panels, finishes, fire suppression, mechanical and electrical.
• Also, at the Walgreens site adjacent to Fire Station No. 2, the project will include
installation and/or repair of all the required curb and gutter; storm water requirements for
proper drainage and detention; utility relocations; landscaping; patch, repair, seal coat
and restripe all affected drive aisles and parking areas; maintain 28 parking stalls north of
the Walgreens/Retail Tenants building and add 10 new parking stalls along the North side
of the drive aisle.
• The project design incorporates energy efficient and environmentally sound design in
accordance with the St. Louis Park’s Green Building Policy. These include use of
passive solar energy and day-lighting; regionally-sourced, recycled, and low-emissions
materials; high efficiency boilers and chillers; and best management practices for storm
water management.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Subject: Fire Stations - Approval of Plans and Specifications, and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids
This project will resolve the structural, operational, space needs, accessibility, and gender equity
issues present in the existing stations. This project has also been coordinated with the pending
improvements and reconstruction of Northside Park.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
The site selection and design of the new fire stations included an extensive public process. Most
recently, there were three community meetings in June, July and September, 2010 that were
focused on the site and building designs. Those attending the community meetings have been
primarily residents that live near the stations. Overall, those in attendance have supported the
fire stations project.
For Fire Station No. 1, staff held fourth meeting with a few of the adjacent neighbors in October
2010 to discuss issues related to parking lot screening, lighting, building appearance, and
landscaping to follow up on questions that were raised at the third neighborhood meeting. Staff
presented the plans to the Elmwood Neighborhood at its annual meeting in November 2010.
The site plans and building designs have incorporated many of the suggestions from these public
meetings.
In addition to the informal public input meetings, there have been subsequent public hearings
and meetings held by the Planning Commission and City Council regarding the conditional use
permits, plat, subdivision variance, and right-of-way vacation that were required for the project.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
This project was planned for and included in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program
(CIP). The project budget for constructing both stations is approximately $15.5 million. The
City Council received a full update on this project at a study session prior to the regular City
Council meeting on February 28, 2011.
Approximately $3 million of this project cost will be paid by the Fire portion of the Police and
Fire Pension Fund with the remaining portion, or $12.5 million, coming from bond proceeds
issued in December 2010.
Staff recommends including the following alternates in the construction bids, which may be
deducted if necessary or added if possible, depending on how the bids come in relative to the
budget.
• Alternate No. 1: Provide vapor mitigation system as indicated in drawings and
specifications.
• Alternate No. 2: Provide a Natural Gas powered Emergency Generator in lieu of Diesel
Fuel Powered Generator specified in base bid.
• Alternate No. 3: S2 Door Access control system is to be provided as the base bid door
access control system. Alternative providers may submit as Alternate Bid no. 3.
Alternate No. 4: UHL Company is to be provided as the base bid temperature control
provider. Alternative providers may submit as Alternate Bid No. 4.
• Alternate No. 5: Base bid includes installation of vehicle exhaust systems including:
motor operated hose reels, exhaust tubing, tailpipe connectors, associated exhaust ducts,
fans, controls and electrical circuits and connections associated with the vehicle exhaust
systems. Submit alternate bid to exclude items listed.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Subject: Fire Stations - Approval of Plans and Specifications, and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids
• Alternate No. 6: Base bid includes installation of electric humidifier systems including
steam generators, distribution tubing, duct mounted distributor(s), high limit humidistat,
controls and electrical circuits and connections associated with the electric humidifier
systems. Submit alternate bid to exclude items listed.
• Alternate No. 7: Install specified Storefront Framing system and glazing in lieu of
operable window units where indicated on the drawings.
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Staff is suggesting the following schedule:
March 7, 2011 - City Council approval of plans and authorization to bid
March 17 & 24, 2011 - Advertise bids
March 29, 2011 - Bid opening
April 11, 2011 - City Council to review bid tab report and award contract
April 15, 2011 - Begin construction
May 1, 2012 - Project completion
NEXT STEPS AND TIMELINES:
If the City Council approves the plans and specifications and authorizes bids, staff will receive
bids on March 29, 2011. The Council will be asked to approve the successful bids and authorize
the project to begin at its April 11, 2011 meeting. Project construction will begin following
council approval.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Engaging the community in the design process, minimizing negative impacts of the stations on
surrounding residents, designing energy efficient buildings that meet or exceed the City’s green
building policy, and building an aesthetically pleasing building relate to all four Vision St. Louis
Park Strategic directions.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief
Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Nancy Deno Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Subject: Fire Stations - Approval of Plans and Specifications, and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids
RESOLUTION NO. 11-____
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PROJECT REPORT, ESTABLISHING
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 20083001 AND 20083002 APPROVING PLANS
AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report related
to the demolition and construction of Fire Station No. 1 and Fire Station No. 2, City Project Nos.
20083001 and 20083002.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The Project Report regarding Project Nos. 20083001 and 20083002 is hereby accepted.
2. Such improvement as proposed is necessary, cost effective, and feasible as detailed in the
Project Report.
3. The proposed project, designated as Project Nos. 20083001 and 20083002, is hereby
established and ordered.
4. The plans and specifications for the making of the improvement, as prepared under the
direction of the Architect, DLR GROUP KKE, or designee, are approved.
5. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least two weeks in the official
newspaper and at least one week in the Construction Bulletin, an advertisement for bids for
the making of said improvement under said-approved plans and specifications. The
advertisement shall appear not less than ten (10) days prior to the date and time of receipt of
bids, and specify the work to be done, state the date and time bids will be received by the
City Clerk, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk
and accompanied by a bid bond payable to the City for five (5) percent of the amount of the
bid.
6. The Construction Manager, Kraus Anderson Construction Company, or designee, shall report
the receipt of bids to the City Council shortly after the letting date. The report shall include a
tabulation of the bid results and a recommendation to the City Council.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 7, 2011
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
Agenda Item #: 8b
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 Report: Local Street Rehabilitation Project – Pavement Management Area 7, Project
Nos. 2010-1000 & 2011-1400.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting the project report, establishing Improvement Project No.
2010-1000 and Improvement Project No. 2011-1400 approving plans and specifications, and
authorizing advertisement for bids for these improvements.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to continue implementation of the City’s Pavement Management
Program?
BACKGROUND:
Several years ago, staff developed and the City Council adopted a Pavement Management
Program to address the problem of deteriorating streets within the city. Many of the roads are
now approaching 40 years of age or more. The city’s streets are still in relatively good condition
due to the fact that the streets were built well, are generally situated on good soils, utilize curb &
gutter for drainage and have been well maintained. City maintenance crews have continually
worked to keep streets in decent condition using basic maintenance strategies such as patching,
crack filling and seal coating. However, as pavements age, more aggressive maintenance
strategies are needed to prolong their life.
The Pavement Management Program was developed to extend pavement life and enhance
system-wide performance in a cost-effective and efficient way by providing the right
maintenance or repair at the right time. Using the City’s pavement management software, staff
obtains street condition ratings and monitors their performance. Staff then evaluates the
condition of streets and selects cost-effective treatments to extend pavement life.
ANALYSIS:
The 2011 construction season will be the seventh year of implementing the City’s Pavement
Management Program. This year’s work, Project No. 2010-1000, will be performed in Area 7 of
the City’s 8 pavement management areas. It includes the Elliot, Elliot View, Willow Park and
Pennsylvania Park Neighborhoods. The attached map identifies which streets in Area 7 have
been selected for rehabilitation. Selection was based on previous condition surveys of the streets
and field evaluations to determine current conditions of the pavement, curb and gutter, and the
city’s underground utilities. A team of staff members was formed to select streets for inclusion
in this year’s program and to recommend appropriate rehabilitation techniques. The team
included members of Operations, Utilities, Engineering and the Public Works Asset
Management Group.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
Subject: Local Street Rehabilitation Project – Pavement Management Area 7, Project Nos. 2010-1000 & 2011-1400
The residential streets selected this year for rehabilitation were all originally constructed in a
similar fashion. The structure of most of the streets consists of a two (2) inch layer of asphalt
pavement over six (6) inches of quality gravel. Staff has determined that an appropriate
treatment for rehabilitating the streets consists of removing all of the old asphalt pavement and
replacing it with three (3-1/2) inches of new pavement. The thicker asphalt section is being used
to provide for heavier vehicles, such as garbage trucks, and the increased volume of traffic on the
streets. This will also allow for flexibility of future maintenance. For example, with a 2-inch
thickness of asphalt, a typical mill and overlay is not possible because the asphalt layer is too
thin. With 3-1/2 inch thickness, 1.5 inches of asphalt can be milled off and replaced with the
same thickness of new pavement.
The Engineering Staff has prepared plans and specifications for this year’s project. In
conjunction with the pavement replacement, water main will also be replaced on two blocks in
the Pennsylvania Park Neighborhood (1800 block of Oregon and Nevada Avenue, Project No.
2011-1400). During the installation of the new water main, water service will be maintained to
each of the properties through a temporary system. Along with replacing the water main, the
residents on these streets will have the option of replacing their water service line (at their
expense) from the main to the shut-off valve located at the property line. The city’s contract will
include items for this work. The bid price on these items will be charged against those properties
choosing to replace their water service line. Owners will be requested to prepay or be specially
assessed this cost. Owners may also opt to arrange to do this work utilizing their own hired
contractor, provided it does not interfere with or delay work on the city contract. Other utility
work will include drainage system (curb & gutter and catch basin) repairs and replacement of old
hydrants at various locations throughout the project.
Utility companies have been contacted to inform them of the city’s proposed work plan and
schedule. For those companies that have buried utilities, staff has asked them to consider
replacing any aging systems prior to our paving of the streets. Centerpoint Energy has indicated
they will be replacing gas main lines and service lines on about half the streets in the project
area. Centerpoint Energy typical performs their gas main work just prior to the start of the street
work, usually late April to mid-May.
PUBLIC PROCESS:
Staff recently invited area residents and neighborhood association leaders to an open house to
review the preliminary plans for the proposed street construction work. Eight residents attended
the open house on February 16, 2011. Typical questions were raised about the timing of the
project and what construction impacts would be felt by the residents while the project is
underway. The project is anticipated to start in early June and last approximately 2-1/2 months.
Work on any one block will usually last about five weeks. During that time, crews will replace
the curbing, if needed, then remove the pavement, grade the street, and then pave the first layer
of bituminous. During this work, residents will nearly always have access to their driveways and
overnight parking will be allowed on the street. Driveways will not be accessible for up to one
week when concrete aprons are replaced. The final layer of bituminous is typically placed near
the end of the project and will result in another day of disruption for any one block.
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 8b) Page 3
Subject: Local Street Rehabilitation Project – Pavement Management Area 7, Project Nos. 2010-1000 & 2011-1400
Project Timeline:
Should the City Council approve this Project, the following schedule is proposed:
• Approval of Plans/Authorization to Bid by City Council March 7, 2011
• Advertise for bids Mid March, 2011
• Bid Opening April 7, 2011
• Bid Tab Report to City Council; Award contract April 18, 2011
• Begin Construction Early June, 2011
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
This project was planned for and is included in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program
with an estimated budget of $1,371,850. Project funding will be provided by two sources, the
Pavement Management Fund, Project No. 2010-1000, for the associated street work and the
Water Utility Fund, Project No. 2011-1400, for the associated water main work. The Engineer’s
estimate for the total cost of the project is $1,542,430 which includes 5% for contingencies and
12% for engineering & administration. The difference between the CIP budget and the
Engineer’s estimate can be attributed to additional street rehabilitation work included in the
project than what was originally planned.
Cost and funding details are as follows:
Estimated Costs
Construction Cost $1,318,316.00
Contingencies (5%) $ 65,916.00
Engineering & Administration (12%) $ 158,198.00
Total $1,542,430.00
Funding Sources
Pavement Management Fund $1,328,355.00
Water Utility Fund $214,075.00
Total $1,542,430.00
VISION CONSIDERATION:
None.
Attachments: Resolution
Map of Streets for Construction in Area 7
Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Scott Brink, City Engineer
Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Nancy Deno Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 8b) Page 4
Subject: Local Street Rehabilitation Project – Pavement Management Area 7, Project Nos. 2010-1000 & 2011-1400
RESOLUTION NO. 11-___
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PROJECT REPORT,
ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2010-1000 & 2011-1400
APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NOS. 2010-1000 & 2011-1400
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
City Engineer related to the 2011 Local Street Rehabilitation Program.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The Project Report regarding Project No. 2010-1000 and Project No. 2011-1400 is
hereby accepted.
2. Such improvements as proposed are necessary, cost effective, and feasible as detailed in
the Project Report.
3. The proposed projects, designated as Project No. 2010-1000 and Project No. 2011-1400,
are hereby established and ordered.
4. The plans and specifications for the making of these improvements, as prepared under the
direction of the City Engineer, or designee, are approved.
5. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least two weeks in the official
City newspaper an advertisement for bids for the making of said improvements under
said-approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall appear not less than ten
(10) days prior to the date and time bids will be received by the City Clerk, and that no
bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a
bid bond payable to the City for five (5) percent of the amount of the bid.
6. The City Engineer, or designee, shall report the receipt of bids to the City Council shortly
after the letting date. The report shall include a tabulation of the bid results and a
recommendation to the City Council.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 7, 2011
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
28TH ST W
I-394
29TH ST W
CEDA
R L
A
K
E
R
D
LOUISIANA AVE STEXAS AVE S27TH ST W
SERVICE DR HWY 394 S
JERSEY AVE SKENTUCKY AVE S26TH ST W
14TH ST W
DAKOTA AVE SFLORIDA AVE SGEORGIA AVE SNEVADA AVE S16TH ST W
PENNSYLVANIA AVEIDAHO AVE SELIO
T
VI
E
W
R
D
23RD
S
T
W
18
T
H
S
T
W
13TH LA
22ND ST W
HAMPSHIRE AVE S24TH ST
WMARYLAND AVE SUTAH AVE S25TH ST
W
VICTORI
A
W
A
Y
COLORADO AVE SQUEBEC AVE
SOREGON AVE SBRUNSWICK AVE SBLACKSTONE AVE SFRANKLIN AVE W
SUMTER AVE SKENTUCK
Y
L
A
WA
Y
Z
A
T
A
B
L
V
D
EDGEWOOD AVE S13 1/2 ST W
RHODE ISLAND AVE SALABAMA AVE SVIR
G
I
N
I
A
C
I
R
N
QU
E
B
E
C
D
R
OREGON CTU
T
A
H
D
R
LOUISIANA CT
VIRGI
NI
A
A
V
E
S
VICTORI
A
C
U
R
V
E LOUISIANA AVE S (E)WESTWOOD HILLS DRVICTOR
IA
C
IRCLE
TEXAS CIR
FLORIDA AVE SCOLORADO AVE SUTAH AVE SSUMTER AVE S24TH
S
T
W
16
T
H
S
T
W
27TH ST WOREGON AVE SRHODE ISLAND AVE SJERSEY AVE SEDGEWOOD AVE SQUEBEC AVE SALABAMA AVE S14TH ST W
KENTUCKY AVE SGEORGIA AVE S18TH ST W
QUEBE
C
A
V
E
S
16TH ST W
TEXAS AVE SIDAHO AVE S18TH ST W
KENTUCKY AVE S14TH ST W
HAMPSHIRE AVE SBLACKSTONE AVE SIDAHO AVE SPENNSYLVANIA AVEDAKOTA AVE SFLORIDA AVE S22ND ST W
NEVADA AVE SNEVADA AVE SPENNSYLVANIA AVE23RD ST W
26TH ST
W
22ND ST W
16TH ST W HAMPSHIRE AVE SOREGON AVE SDAKOTA AVE SBRUNSWICK AVE SEDGEWOOD AVE S10-21-2010tw
±
2011 Pavement Management Project
Legend
Street Rehabilitation Segments
City Council Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 8b)
Subject: Local Street Rehabilitation Project – Pavement Management Area 7, Project Nos. 2010-1000 & 2011-1400 Page 5
Meeting Date: March 7, 2011
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:
Highway 100 Project Update.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The purpose of this report and study session discussion is to obtain Council feedback on possible
Highway 100 access and city street options north of Minnetonka Boulevard and west of Highway
100.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
City Council requested staff at the February 7th Study Session to evaluate impacts and options
associated with the proposed closing of the W. 27th Street entrance ramp to southbound
Highway 100. Based on preliminary discussions with our consultant, SEH, staff would like to
discuss their initial findings as well as present basic information and results from the previously
completed 2008 north - south transportation options study. To aid in the eventual selection of a
Mn/DOT preferred alternate for Highway 100 reconstruction, Council feedback is desired in the
following areas:
1. Does Council wish to try to maintain the status quo or to improve access to and/or
through the Birchwood and Bronx Park neighborhood areas?
2. What particular access points or through streets, if any, would Council like staff to
consider or avoid?
3. What further information and next steps will Council require in further evaluating this
issue?
BACKGROUND:
History - At the September 8, 2008 Study Session Council was provided information and an
update regarding staff’s evaluation and investigation into improving north-south transportation
options as identified in the Vision St. Louis Park process. A copy of the SEH Technical
Memorandum, St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study – Forecasting Methodology – Draft
dated August 11, 2008 was also provided to the Council then. The Study Session report of
September 8, 2008 is attached to this report for Council convenience. The SEH study will be
provided to interested Council members upon request.
At the January 24, 2011 Study Session, City and Mn/DOT staff explained concepts B and C and
answered questions regarding the proposed Highway 100 project. Council expressed an interest
in concept C with a two way frontage road on the east side of Highway 100 south of Minnetonka
Boulevard along with retention of the W. 27th Street entrance ramp to southbound Highway 100.
In addition, the following issues were identified during the course of the Study Session
discussion held on the 24th:
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update
• Determine impact on Toledo homes, if any; - i.e., construction limits, noise walls,
acquisition.
• Work with property owners on preference for noise walls or vegetated berms
• Minimize cut through in neighborhoods and congestion on local streets
• Keep a direct access to SB Highway 100 from Minnetonka Boulevard (make access as
easy as possible)
• Take existing n/s bike trail into account; how do we extend north to the North Cedar Lake
Regional Trail?
• Mitigate congestion on Highway 100 to reduce local traffic
• Determine if frontage road traffic will stack up
• What are the safety requirements/considerations?
• Utica Avenue – what will be done north of Minnetonka Boulevard? (answer - this is up to
the city)
• How wide are bike lanes/sidewalks on Minnetonka bridge (answer - 12 feet)
• Is any part of Webster Park being taken? (answer - no)
• Does the bike/ped bridge on 26th remain? (answer - yes)
At the February 7, 2011 Study Session, staff informed Council that Mn/DOT is proposing to
close the W. 27th Street entrance ramp to southbound Highway 100 for options B, C, and D.
Staff presented City goals and criteria that could be considered in evaluating the Mn/DOT
proposed concepts. Council expressed significant concern over the proposed closure of the W.
27th Street entrance ramp and requested staff to evaluate impacts and possible mitigation
associated with that closure. Council also expressed a desire to discuss north - south
transportation needs in the City and how they may relate to the proposed Highway 100 project.
Current - Since the Study Session of February 7th, staff has retained SEH to assist city staff in
this effort. SEH has started evaluation of several access options since then. Staff will provide
this information at the Study Session.
Next Steps - Mn/DOT has developed the following tentative schedule for this project:
• Mn/DOT Selection of a Preferred Alternative January 2011
• Traffic Modeling / Operational Analysis February - March 2011
• Mn/DOT Staff Approved Geometric Layout June 2011
• Public Open House June 2011
• Municipal Consent Approval Process July - December 2011
• Final Geometric Layout January 2012
• Develop Construction Plans and Specifications January 2012 - September 2015
• Open Bids November 2015
• Construction 2016 thru 2018
Staff has informed Mn/DOT this schedule will need to be delayed several months while Council
evaluates access impacts and mitigation associated with this Mn/DOT project.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The following Strategic Direction and focus area was identified by Council in 2007:
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.
• Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting
St. Louis Park including but not limited to Highway 100 and SWLRT.
• Evaluating and investigating additional north/south transportation options for the
community.
• Increasing use of new and existing gathering places and ensuring accessibility throughout
the community.
Attachments: Study Session Report - September 8, 2008
Prepared by: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Nancy Deno Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update
Meeting Date: September 8, 2008
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:
Vision St. Louis Park Strategic Direction/Focus Area Update.
Focus Area:
• Evaluating and Investigating North-South Transportation Options.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The purpose of this discussion will be to provide the City Council information and an update
regarding staff’s evaluation and investigation of improving north-south transportation options as
identified in the Vision St. Louis Park process. More specifically, this update deals primarily
with traffic studies related to Highway 100. Staff is seeking comments and feedback from
Council.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Should staff continue evaluating north/south transportation options which could lead to specific
future roadway improvements?
BACKGROUND:
History and Recent Activities
One of the strategic directions adopted as part of Vision St. Louis Park is further strengthening
St. Louis Park as a connected and engaged community. A focus area of that strategic direction is
evaluating and investigating north-south transportation options.
As part of that investigation, several elements of transportation planning have been evaluated
further over the past couple of years. These evaluations have generally focused on increasing
mobility in the north-south direction within the City, largely as a result of the relative lack of
through connections. These efforts have included the following:
1) Further evaluation of local traffic impacts as a result of an improved Highway 100 (full-
build). This effort has also included identifying potential future capital projects in
conjunction with Highway 100 improvements.
2) Consideration of non-motorized transportation options as part of the north-south
evaluation. This includes transit, bicycles, and pedestrians. As part of this effort, a
revised comprehensive sidewalk and trail plan is in the process of moving toward
adoption.
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update
Study Session Report of September 8, 2008 - Vision St. Louis Park Strategic
Direction/Focus Area Update
3) Implementation and delivery of key capital improvement projects essential to north-south
mobility. This has included the development and design of separated grade interchange
projects on Highway 7 at Wooddale Avenue and at Louisiana Avenue.
Considerable effort over the past year has focused on evaluating the impact of an improved
Highway 100 (full build). This has included trying to predict impacts on the local system, and
how future traffic congestion and mobility issues can be further addressed. Highway 100
reconstruction (full build) updates were provided to the City Council in May and September of
2007.
In addition to Highway 100 itself, north-south mobility in other local corridors and streets are
being evaluated, based on future traffic level forecasts, and how a Highway 100 improvement
would impact those corridors. These other local north-south corridors include among others,
Louisiana Avenue, Dakota and Edgewood Avenues, and the Highway 100 frontage roads.
Although the strategic direction is focused primarily on north-south mobility, the Highway 100
Improvement also has impacts to east-west connections (Minnetonka Boulevard and Cedar Lake
Road for example). The inter-relation of all of these impacted streets is therefore taken into
account as part of the evaluation.
The Highway 7 capital improvement projects (at Wooddale and Louisiana Ave), and the updated
Sidewalk and Trail Plan are moving forward through their respective processes. Therefore, the
report provided herein focuses primarily on the evaluation work related to Highway 100.
Highway 100 Evaluation
On May 14, 2007, staff presented Council an update on the Highway 100 project and was
directed to implement Phase 1 of a traffic study aimed at understanding what neighborhood
traffic patterns and volumes may result depending on underpass and ramp locations being
offered at the time by Mn/DOT. Staff contracted with Short Elliott Hendrickson (S.E.H.) to
perform the Phase 1 work, which essentially provided base traffic information.
On September 24, 2007, staff provided an update to Council on the Phase 1 work which also
included information on observed changes/shifts with regards to the Highway 100 interim
improvement. Staff also provided Council an opportunity to provide input on pending Phase 2
traffic study tasks. As part of the September 24 Study Session update, S.E.H. provided a
presentation that outlined the following:
1) Transportation Sketch Planning (system possibilities)
2) Future System(s) Evaluation.
As a result, S.E.H. moved forward with a Phase 2 traffic study which focused largely on the
impacts of an underpass and ramps in the area of 26th Street. At the time, Mn/DOT provided the
City with 4 underpass/ramp design alternatives for the City to further review and evaluate.
However, earlier this year staff informed Council that, as a cost saving measure, Mn/DOT was
now likely to program and propose a “rescoped” or “scaled back” version of the full-build
project. This “scaled back” version would not include an underpass as had been offered.
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1) Page 6
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update
Study Session Report of September 8, 2008 - Vision St. Louis Park Strategic
Direction/Focus Area Update
At this time, Mn/DOT has not presented any kind of preliminary design or even a sketch of what
a “scaled back” Highway 100 project would look like. However, City staff is of the
understanding that such an improvement would essentially involve replacement of the bridges
(Minnetonka Boulevard, Highway 7, and C.P. Rail), and an improvement/upgrade of the recent
“temporary” improvements into a more permanent type of construction. The project limits
(particularly at the north end of the project) would shorten significantly. This would result in
minimal or no grade/elevation changes to the Highway 100 mainline, thus providing no
opportunity for an underpass.
As a result of the “scaled-back” approach now proposed by Mn/DOT, staff directed S.E.H. to
further refine the traffic study and system evaluation. This effort better defines and provides a
general understanding of anticipated future traffic levels, potential impacts to the local system,
and what level of benefit (if any) other potential local improvements could have on the system.
The S.E.H. evaluation and report is attached to this report and will be discussed and explained
further at the Study Session on September 8. Very briefly, the S.E.H. report can be summarized
as follows:
1) Without a Highway 100 underpass near the 26th Street area, Minnetonka Boulevard and
Cedar Lake Road are likely to see increased volumes and congestion. However, streets
near the location of the proposed underpass near 26th Street (such as the east and west
frontage roads, 26th Street, 28th Street, etc.) would predictably see more traffic with an
underpass.
2) Other potential north-south mobility “improvements” for the City (other than Highway
100) were also included in the evaluation. It should be noted that the improvements noted
below are not specific roadway proposals, but concepts to assist in evaluating traffic
distribution improvement possibilities.
a) A “through” connection between Edgewood and Dakota Avenue at the BN
Railroad, providing a second north-south link between Minnetonka boulevard and
Cedar Lake Road.
b) Extending Park Place Boulevard south across the BN railroad and linking with the
west frontage road of T.H. 100. However, a location for such an extension was
not identified.
c) Extending Ottawa and France Avenues as through streets, and maintaining and
improving Texas and Louisiana Avenues as through streets.
d) Constructing other improvements further south, including Park Center Boulevard
near Excelsior Boulevard, extending Wooddale Avenue to the east side of
Highway 100 near Park Center Blvd (a new bridge over TH 100 would be
needed), and other improvements as mentioned in the S.E.H. report.
Essentially, these additional linkages would improve north-south connectivity and traffic
flow while somewhat relieving traffic volumes on some existing north-south and east-
west segments. In general, some segments would see increased traffic while others would
see less. Overall however, the system as a whole would improve as traffic would be
better distributed more evenly over an improved grid system. Specific volume increase
and decrease levels for specific streets can be explained further at the Study Session.
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1) Page 7
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update
Study Session Report of September 8, 2008 - Vision St. Louis Park Strategic
Direction/Focus Area Update
Next Steps and Schedule
At this time, no further evaluation is proposed unless Council wishes to direct staff to evaluate
specific improvement options further. Staff is also awaiting further specifics and direction from
Mn/DOT with regards to the “scaled back” Highway 100 improvement.
Questions for the Council to possibly consider further are: Should certain north-south
improvement concepts be considered for inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan? How does the
Council feel with regards to the possibility of discussing these concepts further with the larger
community?
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
This entire study to date has exceeded $60,000. Specific funds for this work / project have been
expended.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This traffic study and proposed highway project complement the following areas of the recently
completed Vision process:
St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community.
Focus areas:
• Developing an expanded and organized network of sidewalks and trails.
• Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding
sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and
SWLRT.
• Evaluating and investigating additional north/south transportation options
for the community.
• Increasing use of new and existing gathering places and ensuring
accessibility throughout the community.
Attachments: S.E.H. Technical Memorandum, St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study –
Forecasting Methodology – Draft dated August 11, 2008.
Prepared by: Scott Brink, City Engineer
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Director of Community Development
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302-1717
SEH is an equal opportunity employer | www.sehinc.com | 320.229.4300 | 800.572.0617 | 320.229.4301 fax
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Mike Rardin, City of St. Louis Park
FROM: Heather Kienitz
Jerilyn Swenson
DATE: August 11, 2008
RE: St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
SEH No. ASTLOU0702.00
OVERVIEW
The initial purpose of this study was to evaluate traffic impacts in the City of St. Louis Park
due to a potential new Trunk Highway (TH) 100 underpass proposed by the Minnesota
Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT). The new underpass was to be located near the 25th
½ Street and 26th Street area north of Minnetonka Boulevard. In conjunction with studying
the impacts of the underpass, the City also reviewed the impacts of potential future
improvements to the local transportation system.
During the TH 100 Underpass Study, Mn/DOT has reconsidered its plan for TH 100.
Mn/DOT scaled back, or “rescoped” the initially proposed “TH 100 Version 6”, which
included revised access with ramp braiding, new CD roadways and a new underpass. As a
cost saving measure, the Mn/DOT rescope of TH 100 will include base improvements to the
existing infrastructure such as increased lane widths and all existing access will remain.
Under the TH 100 Rescope alternative there is no change in the vertical alignment of TH 100
and also no new underpass in the City of St. Louis Park. Thus the City requested that SEH
also produce forecasts for the potential local improvements with the new TH 100 Rescope
alternative.
The Twin Cities regional model (TCRM) was used to complete this task. The model provided
forecast traffic volumes and helped identify potential traffic trends with and without a new
underpass. Five roadway scenarios were included in the first set of analyses and three
roadway scenarios were included in the second set of analyses. This memorandum will
provide information regarding the forecasting process and the resulting demand trends.
Figure 1 shows the study area and the existing transportation system.
TWIN CITIES REGIONAL MODEL OVERVIEW (TCRM)
Traffic forecasts for the study were prepared largely based on the Twin Cities regional
demand model (TRCM) which has been developed to run in the TP+ modeling system
produced by Citilabs.
The TCRM model uses information such as population, households, and employment data to
generate an estimated number of trips for each Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ). TAZs are
geographic areas that divide the planning region. TAZs typically included similar land uses
and land activities and represent the origin and destinations of travel activity in the model.
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 8
St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
August 11, 2008
Page 2
Figure 7 provides the TAZ structure and Table 1 provides the model input socioeconomic
data for the City of St. Louis Park.
The TCRM utilizes the four step modeling process which includes trip generation, trip
distribution, mode choice, and trip assignment.
Trip Generation is the determination of the amount of trips estimated within the study area.
It uses static equations to estimate the number of trips based upon the type of socioeconomic
activity (i.e. households, population, employment, etc.) to generate the number of trips
produced by or attracted to each TAZ.
Trip Distribution assigns the productions and attractions generated during the trip
generation step to their proper origin-destination TAZ location. The trips are distributed
based on the amount of travel activity and the travel time between origin and destination
TAZs.
Mode Choice distributes the trips between each origin and destination and separates the trips
into different forms of travel, either single-occupant vehicles, carpools, and transit.
Trip Assignment distributes the trips to the network links while trying to minimize travel
time or trip distance. Trips for each of the 24-hour periods are routed from each origin zone
to a destination zone onto the highway network using an equilibrium traffic assignment
method. Each of the hourly assignments are added together to produce a daily traffic volume
for each roadway segment being modeled.
FORECAST METHODOLOGY
The methodology for the traffic forecasts is based on methods and procedures as described in
the Mn/DOT Metro District guidelines, “Twins City Travel Demand Forecast prepared for
Mn/DOT Metro”. These guidelines cover the following:
• Model Requirements: The current version (August 2006) of the Twins Cities regional
model (TCRM) from the Metropolitan Council is to be used. For this study, the 2030
regional model was used.
• Model and Parameter Adjustments to Model Inputs: Revised on March 24, 2003.
• Model Output Checks for Reasonableness and Post-Processing Adjustments: Revised
on October 21, 2003.
• Documentation of Forecasts: Revised on July 29, 2003.
The most recent version release of the TCRM was used to develop the traffic forecasts for the
modeled roadways within the study area. The specific process used in developing the traffic
forecasts for the four scenarios utilized the following steps:
1. The base model was reviewed, and obvious network discrepancies were identified
and corrected.
2. Relevant network modifications were identified in the base year model and were
made to the 2030 network.
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 9
St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
August 11, 2008
Page 3
3. Network scenarios were updated with the appropriate changes identified in the
scenario description section.
4. 2030 transit network was reviewed in the regional model and no change was made
since the proposed Southwest Corridor Transitway was already included.
5. The land use and socio-economic data for 2030 was reviewed.
6. Model trips in TAZ 587 were adjusted to account for the Duke Development.
7. 2030 model outputs were adjusted using post-processing guidelines.
8. Traffic forecasts were evaluated for reasonableness.
9. Traffic forecasts were compared for reasonableness with traffic forecasts included in
the TH 7/Wooddatle Avenue/36th Street Traffic Study memorandum dated March 15,
2007 and the Mn/DOT TH 100 CORSIM Modeling Project forecasts dated
September 25, 2006.
The model does account for the proposed Southwest Corridor Transitway, which includes
plans to extend a new light rail transit line through the City of St. Louis Park. The forecast
results shown in Figure 3 through Figure 6 and Figure 13 through Figure 15 include the
transition of some trips to the new light rail transit stations surrounding the City.
SCENARIO DESCRIPTIONS – Mn/DOT TH 100 Version 6
Four forecasts scenarios that include Mn/DOT TH 100 Version 6 were examined using the
TCRM. These scenarios were developed by City of St. Louis Park staff and SEH in
November 2007 to better understand the potential traffic impacts to the City’s future
transportation system with and without the TH 100 underpass relocated from West 23rd Street
to the West 26th Street area. In addition to the underpass, the City identified other potential
improvements to its transportation system to provide better multi-modal connectivity between
neighborhoods and improved links to the future Southwest Corridor Transitway. Some of
these improvements are already planned and others were developed as part of this study. The
following description provides detail regarding the improvements and related scenarios.
Scenario 1: 2030 Minimum Improvements – This scenario is intended as a base scenario to
include only committed projects. This scenario includes Mn/DOT future TH 100 reconstruction.
The TH 100 project maintains the existing entrance ramp to southbound TH 100 near 23rd Street
and does not include a new underpass location in St. Louis Park. Other assumptions for the model
include interchanges at TH 7 and Louisiana and Wooddale Avenues, respectively, as well as the
Duke development (Figure 3).
Scenario 2: 2030 Minimum Improvements with new Underpass location – This scenario is
essentially Scenario 1 with three exceptions. Specifically, the scenario includes Mn/DOT future
TH 100 reconstruction with a new underpass in St. Louis Park in the West 26th Street area, a two-
way frontage roadway west of TH 100 and relocation of the existing southbound TH 100 entrance
ramp from West 23rd Street to the 26th Street area (Mn/DOT Option 2). Other assumptions for the
model include interchanges at TH 7 and Louisiana and Wooddale Avenues, respectively, as well
as the Duke development (Figure 4).
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 10
St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
August 11, 2008
Page 4
Scenario 2a: 2030 Minimum Improvements with Underpass location and the existing SB
TH 100 entrance ramp – The only difference between Scenario 2 and Scenario 2a is that
Scenario 2a was modeled with the existing southbound TH 100 entrance ramp at West 23rd Street
remaining in place rather than being relocated to the 26th Street area (Figure 4a).
Scenario 3: 2030 Maximum Improvements – This scenario includes Scenario 2 improvements
and several improved existing facilities and new roadway connections as shown in Figure 5 and
detailed below.
• Louisiana Avenue: assumed existing cross section, base intersection level
improvements and potential for trail/bike lanes extending to future Southwest
Corridor station.
• Dakota Avenue/Wooddale Avenue: assumed existing cross section, extension
across railroad to Edgewood Avenue, base intersection level improvements.
• Texas Avenue: assumed existing cross section and base intersection level
improvements.
• Park Center Boulevard: Connection to Excelsior Boulevard through commercial
area near Quentin Avenue/Excelsior Boulevard intersection. This specific
improvement could serve to relieve the Excelsior Boulevard intersection with the
east TH 100 ramp and two-way frontage road by providing an alternate
circulation pattern and potential separation of local circulation from TH 100
traffic.
• Wooddale Avenue/39th Street: Connection between Wooddale Avenue west of
TH 100 and 39th Street east of TH 100 via a new TH 100 overpass. This specific
improvement could serve local circulation west and east of TH 100 and reduce
demand at the Excelsior Boulevard ramp terminal intersections.
• West Lake Street – Louisiana Avenue to Wooddale Avenue: Enhanced frontage
road linking future LRT station/TOD areas.
• Ottawa Avenue: assumed existing cross section, base intersection level
improvements and direct connection to West 26th Street.
• France Avenue: Extension of France Avenue across railroad to connect between
Excelsior Boulevard and County Road 25.
• West 28th Street: improved continuous connection to TH 100 West Frontage
Road/Utica Avenue.
Scenario 4: 2030 Maximum Improvements with Park Place Boulevard Connection – This
scenario includes all Scenario 3 improvements and a new connection between Park Place
Boulevard and the new underpass location in the West 26th Street area (Figure 6).
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 11
St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
August 11, 2008
Page 5
FORECAST RESULTS – Mn/DOT TH 100 Version 6
In general forecast volumes for the City increased only slightly due the maturity of development
of St. Louis Park. The background growth rate was determined to be somewhere in the range of
0.5% to 1.0% per year. In the area of the new underpass the growth rate was significantly higher
due the traffic demand attributed to the underpass by the TCRM.
Figure 3 through Figure 6 provide the forecast results for each of the four modeled scenarios for
the entire City of St. Louis Park. It is important to note, the demand east and west of the 26th
Street underpass is represented by arrows on the attached Figure 3 through Figure 6. The
assumption can be made that this demand would disperse on parallel routes with preference given
to those routes with improved capacity and continuity.
To assist in comparison of the forecast results, schematic graphics were also created. These
graphics are simple diagrams of TH 100 ramp exits and entrances and the frontage road/local
street interaction with TH 100 under the Mn/DOT reconstruction project. These schematic figures
are Figures 8 through 12 and also provide detailed forecasts for the area adjacent to TH 100
between Cedar Lake Road and Minnetonka Boulevard.
Scenario 2
The Scenario 2 (Minimum Improvements with new Underpass location) model results show that
the underpass relocated to the West 26th Street area provides relief of the east-west demand on
Minnetonka Boulevard and Cedar Lake Road. A comparison of Figures 3 and 4 shows that
demand volume on Minnetonka Boulevard and Cedar Lake Road decreases as a result of the new
underpass.
Scenario 2a
The Scenario 2a (2030 Minimum Improvements with new Underpass location and the existing
SB TH 100 entrance ramp) model results are best explained by comparison of Figures 9 and 10
which represent Scenario 2 and Scenario 2a, respectively. Figures 9 and 10 show that maintaining
the existing West 23rd Street southbound TH 100 entrance ramp results in decreased volume on
the frontage road west of TH 100. Traffic destined to southbound TH 100 exits the frontage
system at the West 23rd Street ramp north of West Side Drive/Stephens Drive.
The demand at the new underpass location decreases by 1,500 vehicles with the ramp located at
the existing West 23rd Street location as compared to the West 26th Street area location. A similar
decrease is also experienced on the east/west local streets in the neighborhoods adjacent to TH
100. The demand on the ramps in Scenario 2 and Scenario 2a is similar (6,900 in Scenario 2 and
7,000 in Scenario 2a).
Scenario 3
Scenario 3 (2030 Maximum Improvements) includes the connection between Dakota Avenue and
Edgewood Avenue. The connection provides an alternate link between demand from the zones
north and south of Cedar Lake Road (commercial to/from residential trips). This decreases
demand significantly on Louisiana Avenue and Cedar Lake Road in the immediate area and also
decreases demand along the Louisiana Avenue corridor. Also the new France Avenue connection
between Excelsior Boulevard and TH 7 in Scenario 3 draws demand from TH 7 and increases
demand on France Avenue north of Minnetonka Boulevard slightly. The demand to continue
northward on France Avenue north of Minnetonka Boulevard toward the Penn Avenue/I-394
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 12
St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
August 11, 2008
Page 6
interchange is not significant compared to the demand to continue eastward into Minneapolis via
the Minnetonka Boulevard/TH 7 common section.
Scenario 4
Scenario 4 (2030 Maximum Improvements with Park Place Boulevard Connection) includes the
connection between Park Place Boulevard and the new West 26th Street area underpass. This
connection increases the demand on the West 26th Street area underpass due to movements
between the northbound TH 100 exit and southbound TH 100 entrance and the commercial
development in the southwest quadrant of the I-394/TH 100 interchange. Demand from this area
that had used the west and east frontage roads under Scenarios 2 and 3 has shifted to the
connection. The connection also decreased demand on the Dakota Avenue extension. The Park
Place Boulevard connection provides another option for travel across the City and over the
railroad tracks.
SCENARIO DESCRIPTIONS – Mn/DOT TH 100 Rescope
Three forecasts scenarios that include the TH 100 Rescope project were examined using the
TCRM. These scenarios are similar to three of those outlined above with respect to
improvements to the local transportation system; however, they were modified to reflect the
new plan for TH 100 under the Rescope effort. The scenarios closely mirror Scenario 1,
Scenario 3 and Scenario 4. The scenarios have been renamed as follows to reflect the TH 100
Rescope effort while maintaining the connection to the previous work completed: Scenario
1R, Scenario 3R and Scenario 4R.
The potential improvements to the St. Louis Park transportation system shown in these three
scenarios provide better multi-modal connectivity between neighborhoods and improved
links to the future Southwest Corridor Transitway. Some of these improvements are already
planned and others were developed as part of this study. The following description provides
detail regarding the improvements and related scenarios.
Scenario 1R: 2030 Minimum Improvements – This scenario is intended as a base scenario to
include only committed projects. Assumptions for the model include interchanges at TH 7 and
Louisiana and Wooddale Avenues, respectively, as well as the Duke development (Figure 13).
Scenario 3R: 2030 Maximum Improvements – This scenario includes Scenario 1R
improvements and several improved existing facilities and new roadway connections as shown in
Figure 14 and detailed below.
• Louisiana Avenue: assumed existing cross section, base intersection level
improvements and potential for trail/bike lanes extending to future Southwest
Corridor station.
• Dakota Avenue/Wooddale Avenue: assumed existing cross section, extension
across railroad to Edgewood Avenue, base intersection level improvements.
• Texas Avenue: assumed existing cross section and base intersection level
improvements.
• Park Center Boulevard: Connection to Excelsior Boulevard through commercial
area near Quentin Avenue/Excelsior Boulevard intersection. This specific
improvement could serve to relieve the Excelsior Boulevard intersection with the
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 13
St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
August 11, 2008
Page 7
east TH 100 ramp and two-way frontage road by providing an alternate
circulation pattern and potential separation of local circulation from TH 100
traffic.
• Wooddale Avenue/39th Street: Connection between Wooddale Avenue west of
TH 100 and 39th Street east of TH 100 via a new TH 100 overpass. This specific
improvement could serve local circulation west and east of TH 100 and reduce
demand at the Excelsior Boulevard ramp terminal intersections.
• West Lake Street – Louisiana Avenue to Wooddale Avenue: Enhanced frontage
road linking future LRT station/TOD areas.
• Ottawa Avenue: assumed existing cross section, base intersection level
improvements and direct connection to West 26th Street.
• France Avenue: Extension of France Avenue across railroad to connect between
Excelsior Boulevard and County Road 25.
• West 28th Street: improved continuous connection to TH 100 West Frontage
Road/Utica Avenue.
Scenario 4R: 2030 Maximum Improvements with Park Place Boulevard Connection – This
scenario includes all Scenario 3R improvements and a new connection between Park Place
Boulevard and the West 27th Street SB TH 100 entrance ramp (Figure 15).
FORECAST RESULTS – Mn/DOT TH 100 Rescope
Figures 13 through 15 provide the forecast results for the entire City of St. Louis Park under each
of the three modeled scenarios that include the Mn/DOT TH 100 Rescope plan. It is important to
note, the east and west neighborhood traffic demand is represented by arrows on these figures.
The assumption can be made that this demand would disperse on parallel routes with preference
given to those routes with improved capacity and continuity.
To assist in comparison of the forecast results, schematic graphics were also created. These
graphics are simple diagrams of TH 100 ramp exits and entrances and the frontage road/local
street interaction with TH 100 under the Mn/DOT TH 100 Rescope plan. These schematic figures
are Figures 16 through 18 and also provide detailed forecasts for the area adjacent to TH 100
between Cedar Lake Road and Minnetonka Boulevard.
Scenario 3R
Scenario 3R (2030 Maximum Improvements) which is represented by Figure 14, includes a
connection across the railroad between Dakota Avenue and Edgewood Avenue as well as an
improved continuous connection between Louisiana Avenue and the TH 100 West Frontage
Road/Utica Avenue along West 28th Street. A comparison of Figure 13, which represents the
Minimum Improvements and Figure 14, shows a significant decrease on Minnetonka Boulevard
west of TH 100 and on Louisiana Avenue south of Cedar Lake Road due to these new roadway
connections. The connections provide alternate local links for TH 100 demand and for demand
between the zones north and south of the railroad (commercial to/from residential trips).
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 14
St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
August 11, 2008
Page 8
The France Avenue connection between Excelsior Boulevard and TH 7 in Scenario 3R draws
demand from Beltline Boulevard/Monterey Drive and TH 7 and slightly increases demand on
France Avenue north of Minnetonka Boulevard.
Scenario 4R
Scenario 4R (2030 Maximum Improvements with Park Place Boulevard Connection) which is
represented by Figure 15, includes a north-south connection between Park Place Boulevard and
West 28th Street. The forecast ADT for this connection is 8,600. A comparison of Figure 14 and
Figure 15 model results show that due to the demand on the new connection there is a slight
decrease in Louisiana Avenue traffic in the study area. Also, Minnetonka Boulevard west of TH
100 also exhibits a decrease in traffic. The Park Place Boulevard connection also increases the
demand on the West Frontage Road/Utica Avenue south of the Park Place Boulevard intersection
significantly as shown in a comparison of Figures 17 and 18 (5,400 and 11,900 respectively).
This connection provides a desirable alternate to the circulation that currently occurs on the
Frontage Roads in the area.
Comparison of Mn/DOT TH 100 Version 6 and Mn/DOT TH 100 Rescope
Without a TH 100 underpass near the 26th Street area, Cedar Lake Road and Minnetonka
Boulevard show an increase in traffic. On the contrary, the east and west frontage roadways, West
28th Street and 26th Street east of TH 100 all experienced lower traffic volumes without the 26th
Street area underpass. The Mn/DOT Version 6 underpass provided relief to the existing TH 100
underpasses and Minnetonka Boulevard; however, it did increase traffic along local east-west
roadways that had a direct connection to the 26th Street underpass.
In addition, the maintaining of the three entrance ramps to southbound TH 100 under the TH 100
Rescope effort spreads this ramp demand out, decreasing the forecast volumes along the frontage
roads and along the potential Park Place Boulevard connection.
s:\pt\s\stlou\070200\memo\august update\th100 underpass forecast memorandum 081108.doc
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 15
St. Louis Park TH 100 Underpass Study - Forecasting Methodology - DRAFT
August 11, 2008
Page 1
Attachment 1
Attachment 1
Figures 1 – 18
Table 1
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 16
2005 2030 Annual Growth 2005 2030 Annual Growth 2005 2030 Annual Growth 2005 2030 Annual Growth
523 5,011 5,144 0.09% 1,995 2,053 0.10% 251 255 0.05% 1,383 1,395 0.03%
565 1,759 1,717 -0.08%851 867 0.06% 109 112 0.09% 210 540 3.20%
572 2,017 2,055 0.06% 789 822 0.14% 155 160 0.11% 303 317 0.15%
573 1,657 1,805 0.29% 802 863 0.24% 1,246 1,315 0.18% 812 744 -0.29%
574 1,725 1,716 -0.02%823 844 0.08% 103 168 1.64% 541 1,002 2.08%
575 474 530 0.37% 202 230 0.43% 1,538 1,570 0.07% 351 320 -0.31%
576 4,169 4,420 0.20% 1,836 1,920 0.15% 42 45 0.23% 496 605 0.66%
577 2,562 2,995 0.52% 1,206 1,360 0.40% 23 25 0.28% 131 335 3.18%
578 2,685 2,955 0.32% 1,104 1,230 0.36% 57 60 0.17% 1,957 1,955 0.00%
579 1,054 1,045 -0.03%552 580 0.17% 96 100 0.14% 368 470 0.82%
580 392 400 0.07% 169 180 0.21% 544 605 0.35% 3,124 6,687 2.57%
581 1,118 1,230 0.32% 512 535 0.15% 404 430 0.21% 1,115 1,680 1.38%
582 1,270 2,730 2.58% 599 1,300 2.62% 717 760 0.19% 5,959 6,270 0.17%
583 1,901 2,830 1.34% 1,195 1,450 0.65% 340 360 0.19% 1,319 1,300 -0.05%
584 1,278 1,505 0.55% 888 940 0.19% 38 40 0.17% 652 650 -0.01%
585 3,573 3,600 0.03% 1,524 1,600 0.16% 53 55 0.12% 640 795 0.73%
586 1,155 1,272 0.32% 630 700 0.35% 107 110 0.09% 175 240 1.06%
587 0 0 --0 0 -- 221 240 0.28% 6,324 7,760 0.68%
588 762 1,330 1.87% 528 950 1.98% 380 395 0.13% 4,899 4,885 -0.01%
589 2,745 2,940 0.23% 1,276 1,350 0.19% 233 245 0.17% 1,716 1,705 -0.02%
590 4,626 4,945 0.22% 2,070 2,149 0.12% 223 240 0.25% 236 660 3.49%
591 2,386 2,760 0.49% 1,001 1,150 0.46% 58 60 0.11% 1,096 1,100 0.01%
592 2,703 2,835 0.16% 1,306 1,350 0.11% 78 80 0.08% 436 435 -0.01%
593 2,743 2,780 0.04% 1,109 1,160 0.15% 332 345 0.13% 1,963 2,270 0.49%
614 5,680 5,599 -0.05%3,000 3,015 0.02% 266 287 0.25% 2,685 2,866 0.22%
657 3,025 3,718 0.69% 1,527 1,755 0.46% 288 430 1.35% 5,897 7,365 0.74%
Total 58,470 64,856 0.35% 27,494 30,353 0.33% 7,902 8,492 0.24% 44,788 54,351 0.65%
Table 1
Population Non-Retail EmploymentHouseholdRetail Empolyment
3. 2005 and 2030 Data for TAZ 523, 565, 572, 573, 574, 586, 593, 614, and 657 does include portions outside St. Louis Park city limits
2. Only portions of TAZ 523, 565, 572, 573, 574, 586, 593, 614, and 657 are within St. Louis Park.
4. Grey highlighted if negative growth
Socio-Economic Data by TAZ from Twin Cities Regional Model
City of St. Louis Park, MN
TAZ Number
Note:
1. TAZ 575, 576, 577, 578, 579, 580, 581, 582, 583, 584, 585, 587, 588, 589, 590, 591, and 592 are entirely within St. Louis Park.
Special Study Session Meeting of March 7, 2011 (Item No. 1)
Subject: Highway 100 Project Update Page 17