HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/03/15 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
MARCH 15 2010
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Hennepin County Attorney and Hennepin County Sherriff
2b. League of Women Voter’s 90th Anniversary
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Special Study Session Minutes of March 1, 2010
3b. City Council Minutes of March 1, 2010
3c. Study Session Minutes of March 8, 2010
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
Recommended Action:
Motion to appoint citizen representatives to fill vacancies on the Police Advisory
Commission with terms as follows:
Name Commission Term
Expiration
Gregg Lindberg Police Advisory Commission 12/31/2010
Matthew Flory Police Advisory Commission 12/31/2010
Rashmi Seneviratne Police Advisory Commission 12/31/2011
Kimberly Mayes Police Advisory Commission 12/31/2012
Meeting of March 15, 2010
City Council Agenda
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing - Liquor License --- Ringo
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve application from Ringo
Restaurants, Inc. dba Ringo for an on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor license to
be located at 5331 16th Street with the license term through March 1, 2011.
6b. Public Hearing to Revise Compost Ordinance
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Approve 1st Reading of Ordinance
adopting revisions to composting ordinance and set Second Reading for April 5,
2010
6c. Marriott Hotel ---Vacation, Termination of a Special Permit, Final PUD and Plat
Recommended Action:
Mayor to close public hearing.
Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance approving the Vacation of a drainage
and utility easement at 600 Highway 169, and setting the Second Reading of the
proposed Ordinance for April 5, 2010.
Motion to Adopt Resolution Rescinding the Special Permit for property located at
400 Highway 169 South, 435 Ford Road, and 600 Highway 169 South.
Motion to Adopt Resolution giving approval for the Final Plat of METROPOINT.
Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD)
under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to Zoning for
Property Zoned O-Office located at 435 Ford Road, 400 Highway 169, and 600
Highway 169
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Gambling Premises Permit for Minneapolis Northeast Lions Club
Recommended Action:
Motion to Adopt Resolution approving issuance of a premises permit for lawful
gambling to be conducted by Minneapolis Northeast Lions Club at Texa-Tonka
Lanes located at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard in St. Louis Park.
Meeting of March 15, 2010
City Council Agenda
8b. Panera Bread --- Major Amendment to Planned Unit Development for Additional
Signage
Recommended Action:
Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Major Amendment to the Planned Unit
Development for additional signage, subject to conditions as recommended by staff
and the Planning Commission.
(Note --- the resolution recommended for adoption represents an amendment to the
resolution originally adopted in 1996 at the time the Park Place Plaza Planning Unit
Development was approved. The new language is underlined)
8c. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Sections of Chapter 8 --- Building and
Contractor Licensing and Chapter 12 Environmental and Public Health Codes
Recommended Action:
Motion to Adopt First Reading of Ordinance amending several sections in Chapter 8
relating to Business and Contractor Licensing and Section 12-1 of the
Environmental and Public Health Code and set second reading for April 5, 2010.
8d. Contract Amendment - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project
Recommended Action:
Motion to approve Amendment No. 1 to Contract 142-08 which provides
additional engineering consulting services for the Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue
Interchange project, Project No. 2012-0100.
9. Communication
Meeting of March 15, 2010
City Council Agenda
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Adopt Resolution Authorizing Award of the 2010 St. Louis Park Arts and Culture
Grants
4b. Approve Resolution amending and restating Resolution No. 09-053 adopted April 6,
2009 approving Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions
4c. Adopt Resolution expressing support of a Statewide Complete Streets Policy
4d. Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $19,660.82 and accepting
work for the traffic signal at W. 36th Street and Park Center Boulevard with Valley Paving,
Inc. Project No. 2009-2101, City Contract No. 86-09
4e. Approve for Filing Vendor Claims
4f. Approve for Filing Human Rights Commission Minutes January 19, 2010
4g. Approve for Filing Planning Commission Minutes December 2, 2009
4h. Approve for Filing Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes September 29, 2009
4i. Approve for Filing Housing Authority Minutes February 10, 2010
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV
cable channel 17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed
live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays
on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of City Hall and on the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17.
The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website.
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call
the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of
meeting.
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 2a
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:
Hennepin County District Attorney Mike Freeman and Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek
Update.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None.
BACKGROUND:
Hennepin County District Attorney Mike Freeman will update the City Council on the activities of
the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office and Hennepin County Sheriff Rich Stanek will update the
City Council on the activities of the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office.
In addition to both Messrs. Freeman and Stanek presenting overviews on the activities of their
offices, staff has requested that they also focus on how their offices work together with local
government, and specifically St. Louis Park.
Council will have time at the end of each presentation to ask questions of Mr. Freeman and Sheriff
Stanek to allow Mr. Freeman time to leave immediately following his presentation due to another
engagement.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
None.
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Lisa Songle, Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 2b
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:
League of Women Voters 90th Anniversary.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Mayor is asked to present the League of Women Voters Proclamation recognizing their 90th
anniversary. Aggie Leitheiser and others from the St. Louis Park League of Women Voters will be in
attendance to accept the proclamation.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None.
BACKGROUND:
The League of Women Voters was founded on February 14, 1920, six months before the
ratification of the 19th Amendment giving women the right to vote. Since that time, the League has
made a profound impact on American democracy and our nation’s history. The League of Women
Voters has played an active role in educating not just women, but the entire American public about
our democracy and about those individuals who are candidates for elective office. Through its
more than 850 chapters nationwide – including the St. Louis Park chapter – the League has helped
make our democracy stronger by sponsoring debates that educate citizens and by making voter and
public policy information easily accessible. The League of Women Voters is one of the original
grassroots citizen networks, directed by the consensus of its members through the United States and
became one of the first organizations in the nation to be official recognized by the United Nations
as a non-governmental organization.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The activities of the League of Women Voters have helped make St. Louis Park a “Connected and
Engaged Community”.
Attachments: Proclamation
Prepared by: Lisa Songle, Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 2b) Page 2
PROCLAMATION
90THANNIVERSARY
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
WHEREAS, the League of Women Voters (LWV) of St. Louis Park is the organization where
hands-on work to safeguard democracy leads to civic improvement; and
WHEREAS, LWV is a nonpartisan political organization, that has fought since 1920 to improve
our system of government and impact public policies through citizen education and advocacy; and
WHEREAS, League members are constantly striving to serve their communities to make strong,
safe, fair and vibrant places to live; and
WHEREAS, the LWV of St. Louis Park believes in representative government and in the individual
liberties established in the Constitution of the United States; and
WHEREAS, the LWV of St. Louis Park has always worked to promote the values and processes of
representative government and has worked with and for this community since 1954 years; and
WHEREAS, the LWV of St. Louis Park collaborates with other organizations to achieve mutual
goals, increase civic participation, create lasting change in the community and to Make Democracy
Work; and
WHEREAS, the LWV, for 90 years, has held the public trust by respectfully bringing elected leaders
and the public together through non-partisan, civil means and through thoughtfully advancing
solutions; and
WHEREAS, St. Louis Park has benefited tremendously from the countless volunteer hours donated
by League members over its 56 year history of enhancing our democracy, most recently to encourage
all residents to participate in the 2010 Census,
NOW THEREFORE, let it be know that the Mayor and Cit Council of the City of St. Louis Park
do hereby proclaim the 15th day of March, 2010, as “LWV Making Democracy Work Day” in
honor of the League of Women Voters 90th Anniversary and urge all residents of St. Louis Park to
pay great tribute and respect to the League of Women Voters for all they do to make our community
healthy, vibrant and strong.
WHEREFORE, I set my hand and cause the Great Seal of the City
of St. Louis Park to be affixed this 15th day of March, 2010.
_________________________________________
Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MARCH 1, 2010
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein, Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt, Julia
Ross, Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Police Chief (Mr. Luse),
Police Lieutenant (Ms. Dreier), Police Lieutenant (Mr. Kraayenbrink), Director of Inspections (Mr.
Hoffman), Inspection Services Manager (Ms. Boettcher), Communications Coordinator (Mr.
Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
1. Rental Licensing Program
Mr. Hoffman presented the staff report and stated that staff will also be providing Council with an
update on the Victoria Lakes apartment complex. He stated the purpose of considering an
ordinance change would be to develop minimum standards and provide an added tool for the city to
utilize if the rental property owner or manager is not doing a good job of managing the business.
Poorly operated businesses can negatively affect livability for the rental building residents, neighbors,
and the community. The City’s goal would be to enhance the ordinance without creating additional
work on the part of complying business owners or City staff.
Mr. Scott presented an overview of the proposed ordinance changes, including the establishment of
criteria that triggers action related to property maintenance deterioration, violation of the crime-free
provisions, failure to provide background checks, failure to have signed leases, or failure to cooperate
with the Police Department or Inspections staff. He explained that if a specific property has a
history that develops a trigger, this could lead to the issuance of a provisional license with specific
conditions to correct the deficiencies that led to the repeated violations. He noted that the primary
reason for issuance of a provisional license would focus on repeated police calls for crime and/or
disorderly conduct. He stated that there is some concern about how this type of ordinance would
impact how people might report crime or disorderly conduct and whether there may be some
intimidation on the part of residents. He pointed out there is a State statute on domestic abuse,
already a part of the City’s crime-free ordinance, that states if someone reports domestic abuse, it
does not go against the property. He also noted that the City already has provisions in its ordinance
that states every lease in the City must have a provision that states if three disorderly/nuisance type
incidents occur in the same unit, the landlord must evict the tenant.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated he felt the proposed ordinance changes should be seriously looked
at. He stated there are other license holders in the City, e.g., alcohol and beer, which face increasing
penalties if they are not compliant with the City’s licensing provisions. He indicated that in the
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
absence of voluntary conformance, the City, under its safety and health provisions, can invoke this
provision. He stated if there are landlords that are not meeting their obligations, it is not the City’s
responsibility to have its police force spending an inordinate amount of time responding to calls at
the offending properties.
Mayor Jacobs agreed with Councilmember Finkelstein.
Councilmember Ross concurred, but expressed concern that if increasing penalties are imposed on a
particular property resulting in a property that cannot be rented, it becomes a financial hardship on
the landlord, which will likely trickle down to the other tenants. She stated her concern is for those
tenants who are being compliant.
Councilmember Sanger also agreed with Councilmember Finkelstein and stated if a landlord is
being responsible, the landlord would already be spending money to address these issues. She
indicated that while conceptually the changes make sense, she felt that landlords are already taking it
out on their tenants by not using rent money for maintenance. She stated that the City already has
in place a per unit “three strikes and you’re out” provision; however, if you have a large apartment
complex with 50 units and a significant amount of bad behavior, but because no one tenant has
three strikes, all the bad behavior continues and there is no incentive to improve. She asked if there
is some way to add a provision to the crime free ordinance that includes consequences for the
landlord when, in the aggregate, there are a significant number of units with consistent problems.
She also asked if there is a way for the City to obtain a Court order to escrow rent money to pay for
repairs in those situations where a landlord consistently fails to perform required maintenance and
building upkeep. She stated that another concern she has is those tenants who are sub-leasing their
units without any background checks being done, and she asked if the City can ban sub-leasing or
require background checks on sub-lessees.
Mr. Scott stated that the City does not have authority to tell a landlord who they can or cannot rent
to.
Councilmember Finkelstein pointed out that the City cannot and does not do this.
Mr. Scott stated that if the provisional license criteria were invoked, the City could probably impose
procedures requiring background checks, but the landlord has the ultimate decision in renting out its
property.
Councilmember Sanger asked if the ordinance requires the posting of a notice so that tenants are
aware of the status of a particular property and who to call at City Hall if they have questions.
Mr. Hoffman replied the ordinance requires that properties post their license.
Mr. Scott stated that if landlords have a seemingly liberal policy on who stays at their property, the
City does not have any basis for intervening in that situation. He indicated that the proposed
ordinance changes will serve to put landlords on notice that if they continue to have violations on
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
their property, additional ordinance requirements will be activated that require action on the part of
the landlord.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to proceed with development of the
ordinance amendments.
Councilmember Mavity requested that the entire ordinance be made available to the City Council
when the proposed amendments are brought back to the Council.
Ms. Dreier presented an update on 8400 Minnetonka Boulevard stating things came to a head at
this property in late summer with behavior affecting people in the surrounding area; and as a result,
the Police Department began collecting data and has learned that there were 503 police calls at this
50-unit property last year. She indicated as a comparison, the 156-unit Meadowbrook complex had
740 police calls and a 43-unit complex on the City’s north side had 101 police calls. She stated that
staff has identified approximately fourteen units in the Minnetonka Boulevard complex that were
responsible for most of the police calls and that staff has been meeting with the building
management weekly to establish procedures for dealing with the problem tenants, but it appears
there are still a significant number of problem units that are not being addressed. She added that in
January and February of this year, the Minnetonka Boulevard complex had 115 police calls, but
noted that 83 of those calls were initiated by the Police Department to check on the property.
Mr. Hoffman stated there was a change in ownership at 8400 Minnetonka Boulevard in January, as
the result of a sale of 51% of the business. He stated that staff has learned that the property has
previously operated on a month-to-month cash lease basis and suggested that staff may wish to look
at this from a zoning perspective. He presented a document containing conditions of 2010 license
issuance drafted by the City Attorney intended to assist the owner in better managing its properties
and improving the condition of its properties, and the new owner appears committed to turning this
property around. He noted that because this property recently had a point of sale, City staff will be
performing a property maintenance inspection that will include a full building inspection of all the
units.
The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
2. Update on the Financial and Operational Status of Project for Pride in Living’s (PPL)
Louisiana Court Development
3. Update on SWLRT Project, the Pending Freight Rail Study and Station Area Planning
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MARCH 1, 2010
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt, Julia
Ross, Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Planning/Zoning
Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Planner (Mr. Fulton), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr.
Olson), Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes).
Guests: SilverCrest Properties (Ms. York).
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations - None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Minutes of February 8, 2010
Councilmember Mavity requested that sixth paragraph on page 6 be clarified to state that
she felt the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission was doing an excellent job as
reflected in its 2010 work plan, and that her comment regarding having an advocate for
green space was a separate issue not intended to reflect on the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Commission’s performance.
The minutes were approved as amended.
3b. City Council Minutes of February 16, 2010
The minutes were approved as presented.
3c. City Council Workshop Minutes of February 19-20, 2010
The minutes were approved as presented.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Mayor Jacobs expressed the City Council’s thanks to Methodist Hospital for hosting the
City Council’s workshop.
3d. Special City Council Minutes of February 22, 2010
The minutes were approved as presented.
3e. Study Session Minutes of February 22, 2010
Councilmember Finkelstein requested that the fifth paragraph on page 4 be amended to read
“Councilmember Finkelstein requested that staff provide the Council with the matrix that
listed all of the project options and the background on each option. He reiterated that even
with current limited federal funding, the City cannot do the Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue
project alone, and will require additional help from the County or Federal government, or
the City may be looking at not doing the project. Mayor Jacobs concurred.”
Councilmember Mavity requested that the sixth paragraph on page 5 be amended to read
“Councilmember Mavity stated it would be helpful to see all of the City’s Commission’s
2009 goals to determine if the Commissions have accomplished all of their goals and to hold
each Commission accountable. She also requested that staff provide a comparison of the
Human Rights Commission’s bylaws with the proposed revisions.”
The minutes were approved as amended.
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine
and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is
desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an
appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion.
4a. Adopt Resolution No. 10-020 authorizing installation of permit parking in front of
3026 Salem Avenue South, Traffic Study 617.
4b. Adopt Resolution No. 10-021 rescinding Resolution No. 88-161 and authorizing
installation of permit parking on the east side of the 3300 Block of Dakota Avenue
South, Traffic Study No. 618.
4c. Approve three lease agreements between the City and Clear Wireless LLC
(Clearwire) for communication antennas (broadband) on the three water towers
located at 5100 Park Glen Road, 8301 W. 34th Street, and 2541 Nevada Avenue
South.
4d. Adopt Resolution No. 10-022 authorizing final payment in the amount of
$17,619.92 and accepting work for the 2009 Random Concrete Repair with Ron
Kassa Construction, Inc. Project Nos. 2009-0003, 0004, & 0006, City Contract No.
85-09.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
4e. Approve right of way purchase in the total amount of $45,000 for Parcel 5 (6017 35th
Street West) and authorize the City Attorney to execute stipulation of settlement.
4f. Support the City of St. Louis Park’s application for MCMA Internship program
funding and participation.
4g. Approve for Filing Vendor Claims.
4h. Approve for Filing Telecommunications Advisory Commission Minutes December
10, 2009.
It was moved by Councilmember Omodt, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to
approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive
reading of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 7-0.
5. Boards and Commissions - None
6. Public Hearings - None
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Parkshore Apartments Planned Unit Development Minor Amendment – 3663
Park Center Blvd.
Resolution No. 10-023
Mr. Fulton presented the staff report and stated this request is for a minor amendment to the
Planned Unit Development (PUD) for interior remodeling, expansion of the dining area and
other communal spaces, and adding an indoor swimming pool at the Parkshore Apartment
senior apartment building. He explained that the impacts of the proposed modifications are
limited and relate to building setbacks, modification of the east side landscaping, and a
reduction of underground parking spaces. He added the new swimming pool area and
dining room addition will encroach upon the building setback toward the east, moving the
building closer to Wolfe Park; these changes are acceptable because it enhances the design of
the property and the level of amenity for residents. He stated the proposed changes include
the addition of two trees, 40 shrubs, and a pergola on the east side of the building adjacent
to the park. He stated that staff recommends approval, subject to the conditions contained
in the resolution. He noted that one of the conditions states that access to and trails within
Wolfe Park shall remain passable at all times both during and after construction.
Ms. Elizabeth York, Development Manager for SilverCrest Properties, appeared before the
City Council and stated that in two other campuses operated by SilverCrest, they built a
wellness center, a warm water pool, and added some special gym equipment designed for
senior residents. She stated these facilities are used frequently by the tenants and there is no
extra fee for tenants to use the facilities. She indicated that the dining room expansion
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
represents changes that were planned for four years ago and residents have expressed a desire
to have a separate dining room.
Councilmember Ross requested information regarding the time frame for construction and
asked if it will interfere with the summer pool opening at the Rec Center.
Ms. York replied they do not anticipate starting construction until September 1st when the
pool is closed.
Councilmember Sanger requested an update regarding the plans for the three-story office
building. She stated that extensions have been granted on this particular building and she
requested that the City Council give consideration to having sunset clauses or some other
type of provision as part of a PUD that ensures that building plans fit with what a developer
is allowed to do with a particular property.
Ms. York stated that they are waiting for market conditions to improve to move forward
with demolition of the three-story office building and construction of the proposed 12-story
condo building.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to adopt
Resolution No. 10-023 amending and restating Resolution Nos. 96-153, 96-189, 03-139,
04-024, and 05-167 adopted on October 7, 1996, December 2, 1996, October 7, 2003,
February 2, 2004, and December 5, 2005 approving a Final Planned United Development
(PUD) under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code and consolidating
conditions from an existing special permit and PUD for property zoned R-C, Multi-Family
Residential granting final PUD approval for a senior housing condominium development at
3601 Park Center Boulevard and combining proposed and existing development of the
Parkshore Campus as a Planned Unit Development – 3601, 3633 and 3663 Park Center
Boulevard Minor Amendment to PUD for renovation and expansion at the Parkshore
Apartment Building – 3663 Park Center Boulevard.
The motion passed 7-0.
8b. Project Report: Local Street Rehabilitation Project – Pavement Management
Area 6, Project No. 2009-1000
Resolution No. 10-024
Mr. Olson presented the staff report. He stated this year’s project is in Area 6 of the
Pavement Management Area and consists of approximately 2.25 miles of selected streets in
the Brookside and Elmwood neighborhoods. He stated that a public meeting was held on
February 18 at which time staff provided an overview of the project. He stated that the
project is scheduled to start in early June and will last approximately two months; roads will
be open to local traffic, access will be provided to driveways at most times, and parking will
be allowed on the streets during the overnight hours. He noted that because of the curb and
gutter work being performed, there may be situations where driveway access is restricted to
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
allow the concrete to cure. He stated the project will be funded from the Pavement
Management Fund for the street work and from the Water Utility Fund for the hydrant
replacement.
Councilmember Mavity expressed her appreciation to staff for their ongoing communication
with the neighborhoods. She stated it is terribly unfortunate that there are so many road
construction projects happening this summer and asked for everyone’s patience and
forbearance during the many road construction projects.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt
Resolution No. 10-024 accepting the project report, establishing Improvement Project No.
2009-1000 approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids for
improvement Project No. 2009-1000.
The motion passed 7-0.
9. Communications
Mayor Jacobs reminded residents of the Empty Bowls event to benefit STEP on Thursday,
March 4th at the Rec Center from 11:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m. and from 4:00-7:00 p.m.
Mayor Jacobs stated the Children First annual meeting is scheduled for March 11th at 7:00
p.m. at Methodist Hospital.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:54 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 3c
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MARCH 8, 2010
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Susan Sanger, Phil Finkelstein, Anne Mavity, Paul
Omodt, Julia Ross, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Human Resources Director (Ms. Gohman),
Controller (Mr. Swanson), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Director of
Inspections (Mr. Hoffman), Police Lieutenant (Mr. Kraayenbrink), Planning/Zoning Supervisor
(Ms. McMonigal), Inspection Services Manager (Ms. Boettcher), and Recording Secretary (Ms.
Hughes).
Guests: Mark Ruff and Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers & Associates
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – March 15 and March 22, 2010
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed special study session agenda for March 15 and the proposed
study session agenda for March 22, 2010. He indicated that the March 15th special study session
will begin at 6:00 p.m. to allow for a 90 minute discussion regarding public safety dispatch. He
stated that Council previously requested further discussion regarding women and minority business
owners; this item will be on the April 12th study session agenda. He added that Council also
requested further discussion regarding instant run-off voting; this item will be on the April 26th study
session agenda.
2. Tax Increment and Bond Financing Basics
Mr. Harmening introduced Mark Ruff and Stacie Kvilvang from Ehlers & Associates.
Mr. Ruff stated that Ehlers & Associates acts as the City’s independent financial advisor and one of
Ehlers’s primary tasks is to create a competitive environment for the issuance of debt. He presented
a comprehensive overview of tax increment, tax abatement, and bond financing as redevelopment
and financing tools. He explained the difference between tax increment financing and tax
abatement, and noted that the tax abatement tool has only been used once in the City. He stated
that the complexities involved with tax increment and tax abatement are more about the property
tax system in Minnesota and not the policy itself.
Mr. Hunt stated that tax abatement requires County Board approval and historically it had not been
used very much as a business development tool.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3c) Page 2
Ms. Kvilvang explained tax capacity, market value taxes and fiscal disparities taxes, pointing out that
the fiscal disparities tax is not followed anywhere else in the country and has been in place since the
1970’s.
The City Council discussed fiscal disparities and the impact of this tax on the City’s commercial and
industrial development.
Ms. Kvilvang presented a map depicting the City’s TIF Districts and explained eligible uses of TIF
financing, including land acquisition, demolition and remediation. She noted that ineligible uses
including recreation, City buildings, and certain enhanced public improvements. She stated that
each redevelopment project has a development agreement, with the City or developer fronting the
TIF costs; the City has typically required the developer to obtain its own financing and utilize a
“pay-as-you-go” system and this is a lower risk proposition for the City.
Mr. Ruff then presented an overview of the City’s current debt obligations and stated the City’s
overall outstanding General Obligation (G.O.) debt is approximately $31 million. He added the
City has been fairly conservative with its outstanding G.O. debt. He discussed the City’s upcoming
G.O. Housing Improvement Area Bonds and refinancing activity planned in 2010. He indicated
that in 2011, the City has additional bond issues planned for the fire stations and potentially some
additional tax increment bonds for the Highway 7/Wooddale Avenue project. He then discussed
tax-exempt versus taxable bonds, and briefly discussed other types of bonds in which the City can
participate, including private activity revenue bonds.
Mr. Harmening stated that the City has over $200 million in private activity revenue bonds from
Park Nicollet; the City has no obligation to repay those bonds and all monies are put into the
housing rehab program.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger expressed the City Council’s thanks to Mr. Ruff and Ms. Kvilvang.
3. Proposed Amendments to City Business Licensing and Environmental Health Codes
Mr. Hoffman presented the staff report and the final revisions proposed to the City’s business
licensing and environmental health codes. He explained the major changes include modification of
the business license requirements for massage therapy establishments, the addition of an individual
massage therapist license, and enhancing the peddlers/solicitors licensing requirements. He stated
that staff has learned that House File No. 1503 was introduced today which includes the creation of
an optional statewide therapist registration program to be set up under the Board of Nursing. He
indicated if the bill is passed as currently written, and the proposed ordinance is adopted, the City
may need to slightly modify the Code later this year to require a city massage therapist license if they
are not registered with the State. He stated that each individual working as a therapist at an
establishment, including the business owners themselves, would be required to be licensed. He
noted that the City’s current zoning code provisions do not allow massage therapy as a home
occupation; however, a massage therapist could go into a person’s home to perform massage.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3c) Page 3
Mr. Hoffman stated that administration of the peddlers and solicitors program will be transferred
from the Inspections Department to the Police Department; this move will help facilitate the
background, licensing and complaint investigation process.
The City Council discussed the increased number of complaints from residents regarding solicitors.
Mr. Hoffman stated the proposed code revisions are intended to reduce problems through requiring
a background investigation and require photo IDs to be visibly worn at all times. He stated there
will be a public education component so that residents are aware of the license requirements.
Mr. Hoffman discussed the re-inspection fee proposed to cover the City’s costs when multiple re-
inspections of licensed properties are necessary due to inaction of the licensee correcting code
violations.
Councilmember Mavity asked a question regarding the service fee when two re-inspections are
required. She asked if the re-inspection fee would be imposed on a property when, in the course of
conducting a re-inspection, additional items are found that require yet another inspection.
Mr. Hoffman stated that generally, this does not happen in these types of business licenses. He
stated the re-inspection fee is intended as a tool to incent the owner to fix all of the problems at the
same time. He explained that if staff is required to re-inspect a property more than two times, each
re-inspection of the property would result in a re-inspection fee being imposed; fees not paid at the
time of inspection would be included with the license renewal.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger asked if the City charges interest on delinquent accounts and suggested that
this is something that should be considered by staff.
Mr. Hoffman replied that right now, no interest is charged. He stated that staff could study whether
charging interest or a late fee is reasonable without creating any additional burden on staff.
Councilmember Mavity asked if there is any penalty associated with the City’s suspension and/or
revocation of a massage therapist license.
Mr. Hoffman stated if there was a situation where someone was performing an illegal activity, the
Police would issue a citation; otherwise, if the massage therapist was operating a legitimate business
and simply failed to obtain a license, a citation would not be issued provided the person responded
by making prompt application and received a license.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger expressed concern that Commercial Entertainment Establishments are only
required to maintain $1 million aggregate liability insurance.
Mr. Hoffman stated that this category only applies to arcades, roller rinks, and movie theaters, and
staff feels that $1 million is a reasonable level and the intent of this provision is to make certain that
the establishment carries a minimum of $1 million in liability insurance as a public service.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3c) Page 4
Mr. Hoffman stated that the first reading of the ordinance will be presented to the City Council on
March 15, 2010.
4. School District Facility Closings
Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report and maps depicting the two school sites. She stated that
the Cedar Manor School site includes City-owned land to the north as well as a play area in the
southern portion of the site that the City operates as public land. She stated that some of the school
and city-owned land on the Cedar Manor site is not buildable due to the flood plain. She indicated
that the Eliot School site is entirely surrounded by single family homes; the City has received some
inquiries about redeveloping this site, including a possible senior housing campus.
The City Council discussed the existing buildings on both sites and possible building improvements
needed to keep and remodel them for another use. It is uncertain if it would be economically
feasible to reuse the buildings.
Mr. Harmening stated that he and Mr. Locke are in agreement that the next step should be a
discussion with the School District about the most effective process that should be undertaken by
the School District and the City to reach agreement on the future redevelopment of the properties.
He added staff would suggest a process similar to that utilized by the City with the Al’s Bar site
wherein the City facilitated a process between the neighborhoods, the School District and other key
stakeholders to determine the best possible reuse of the property.
Councilmember Mavity was in agreement with this approach.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger agreed with staff’s suggestion, but stated it will be important to learn the
School District’s intentions first before engaging other stakeholders in any discussions about future
reuse of the properties. She added it will also be important for the City to inform the School
District that there are certain uses that the City would like to see on one or both of the properties.
Councilmember Omodt agreed with Mayor Pro Tem Sanger and stated that staff and the Council
should first bracket their expectations for the properties before seeking input from the broader
community.
Councilmember Finkelstein concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Sanger and Councilmember Omodt.
It was the consensus of the City Council that it needs to meet with the School Board on this issue,
for staff to prepare recommendations for the City Council’s review regarding land use and
redevelopment opportunities on the Eliot School and Cedar Manor School sites, and for staff to
develop a suggested process to be undertaken pending further discussion with the School Board.
The City Council discussed the agenda for the April 19th meeting with the School Board.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3c) Page 5
It was the consensus of the City Council to place the School District facility closings as the first
priority item on the agenda for the April 19th meeting with the School District, followed by the turf
issue.
5. Commissioner Conflict of Interest Policy
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger stated that Councilmember Mavity requested this item be moved from
Written Reports for discussion.
Councilmember Mavity stated that Section I (Annual Report) in the Rules and Procedures states
that each board or commission shall prepare a written report which includes activities undertaken in
the past year and goals for the coming year. She asked that this section be revised to state that the
annual report shall include a comparison of progress made on the past year’s goals.
It was the consensus of the City Council to revise Section I (Annual Report) to include a statement
that the annual report shall include a comparison of progress made on the past year’s goals.
Councilmember Mavity requested clarification regarding Section L (Appointment) and Section N
(Reappointment), and asked if reappointments are automatic.
Mr. Harmening stated that each staff liaison works with their board or commission to determine a
member’s continued interest in serving. He stated that formal action is required by the City Council
to appoint members and to reappoint members when terms expire.
Councilmember Mavity also requested clarification regarding the housing authority and noted that
the rules and procedures do not list this board’s reporting procedures. She asked if this is due to the
housing authority’s separate status under state statute.
Mr. Harmening agreed to check on reporting requirements for the housing authority.
6. Commercial Areas Market Study Update
Councilmember Mavity asked that the Commercial Market Study include a request for some
guidance on locally owned business, i.e., how does the City and the City Council nurture,
encourage, and support locally owned businesses? She stated she felt the locally owned component
was an important part of the overall market study and would like to see this factored in when
McComb Group conducts their analysis.
Mr. Harmening agreed to ask the McComb Group to discuss opportunities from a market
perspective in these various areas in an effort to help the City understand what the barriers are to
locally owned businesses, and what other communities have done to nurture locally owned
businesses.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 3c) Page 6
7. Communications (Verbal)
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger stated that it appears that more than one meeting will be needed with the
School District and encouraged staff to schedule the meeting as far in advance as possible.
The meeting adjourned at 9:31 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
8. Summary of Results of City Council Workshop
9. Commercial Areas Market Study Update
10. Commissioner Conflict of Interest Policy
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Susan Sanger, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
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:
Award of the 2010 St. Louis Park Arts and Culture Grants.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution Authorizing Award of the 2010 St. Louis Park Arts and Culture
Grants.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council concur with the recommendations made by the Arts and Culture Grant
Review Committee?
BACKGROUND:
The St. Louis Park Arts & Culture Grant program funds art projects and cultural activities that
build bridges between artists and communities, engage people in creative learning, and promote
artistic production and cultural experiences in St. Louis Park.
The Council has supported the Arts and Culture Grant program since its inception in 2006. The
grant application for 2010 was released in December 2009 with a January 29, 2010 deadline.
Grantees have until December 31, 2010 to complete their projects.
The City of St. Louis Park included $16,000 in the 2010 budget for this program (down from
$20,000 in 2009) and the St. Louis Park Community Foundation has committed an additional
$7,000. Their generous gift equates to a total of $23,000 available to fund arts related projects in
2010.
The St. Louis Park Arts & Culture Grants review committee, comprised of the Community
Foundation, St. Louis Park Friends of the Arts, St. Louis Park Schools, city staff and community
members, reviewed 20 applications and identified applicants whose proposals best met the objectives
of the program and are compatible with the Council’s 18-month strategic direction on Vision for
arts, culture and community aesthetics. From the twenty applicants, requests for funding totaled
$95,340.10.
The review committee is recommending seven arts related projects for Council’s consideration,
totaling $22,802.00.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
The following is a short summary of each project based on information in the proposals:
Children First - $1,592 to educate people in the community about the need to oxygenize young
people’s “Sparks”. Sparks is a program that offers a step-by-step approach to help teenagers and
parents, discover, celebrate and act on their unique gifts. The grant will allow for multiple
Happening performances, interactive exhibits at the Children First Ice Cream Social on May 16,
2010 and a Sparks page on the Children First website. During the Sparks Fair at the Ice Cream
Social, Children First will have 20 interactive exhibits by local people, both youth and adults,
demonstrating and discussing their Sparks.
Stacia Goodman- $5,000 to install a large, colorful mosaic mural for the main entrance atrium at
the Rec Center comprised of traditional mosaic materials (ceramic tile, glass and grout) and
reclaimed trash items contributed by St. Louis Park residents and businesses during the City’s spring
clean-up event. The mural would be 3 panels (each 3 feet wide by 5 feet tall) hung next to each
other. The Rec Center staff is in support of the project and will be providing the labor and power
lift required for hanging the mural and have agreed to a three year art ownership and upkeep
agreement with the artist.
Harmony Theater Company and School – $4,210 to assist in the creation and production of a
series of short films that document the history of St. Louis Park through recording experiences of its
citizens. The series will consist of three parts, each focusing on a specific time period: the 1920s,
1930s and 1940s. Every part will be based on first-hand interviews conducted with senior citizens
who lived in St. Louis Park during the given time period, and will be made reflecting the
development of cinematography in 1920-40s: silent movies, “talkies” (in black-and-white), and
animation. The films will be created in the summer of 2010 with the participation of Harmony’s
acting students (primarily aged 8-13) and Harmony’s staff, including its artistic director and film-
making professional. Once completed, Harmony Theater will hold film-screenings at Harmony
Theater, senior centers and nursing homes in St. Louis Park. The film will also be provided to the
City and Historical Society to be shown at their discretion. Copies will also be donated to the St.
Louis Park public libraries and schools.
Maggie’s Farm Theater/SLP Senior Program - $2,500 to launch, produce and debut
performances of a Reader’s Theater Program designed to function as an intergenerational program
that serves the community through expressive storytelling and will feature senior community
citizens. The goal in reader’s theater reaches beyond entertainment value to literacy encouragement
and sharing the joy of reading. The goal for participants is to engage in an artistic expression of
storytelling and creative interaction with peers. Rehearsals for the Reader’s Theater Program will
take place in the fall of 2010, with each story prepared to easily tour throughout the community.
Mixed Precipitation Theater Group – $4,000 to present seven performances of the Picnic
Operetta at community garden sites in St. Louis Park. Mixed Precipitation is a theater group that
provides an on-going experience in live performance forms presenting unique, entertaining, high
quality events highlighting social engagement and providing opportunities for artists to work across
disciplines exploring text, space and new dramatic forms. Mixed Precipitation will present a series of
site specific performances in a unique form – picnic operetta – a hybrid opera performance. The
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
performances are planned at gardens in St. Louis Park including Birchwood Community Garden,
the Bronx Park Community Garden and St. Louis Park Community Garden. Four of the
performances are weekday matinees for students at Peter Hobart Primary Center and Benilde St.
Margaret’s High School. Preview performances will also be held at the St. Louis Park Farmer’s
Market.
The Park Theater Company - $2,500 to produce and present six performances of “Axel and His
Dog” by Don Stolz. This play is about the local children’s television program, hosted by local
celebrity and broadcaster, Clellan Card, from 1954 to 1966. It includes comedy as well as an inside
look behind the scenes of local TV. The play is family-friendly and will have a wide appeal to
persons of all ages. These performances will take place in October/November 2010.
The St. Louis Park High School Choir - $3,000 to present a fundraising gala production of
“Fiddler on the Roof” in May 2010. These funds are to assist with the start-up costs of this initial
gala production in the hopes of generating an ongoing source of revenue to help reduce or defray the
costs of future tours in order to provide an opportunity for more, if not all, choir students to
participate in the tours and Master Classes and Workshops.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The St. Louis Park Arts and Culture Program is a budgeted item for 2010 and is supplemented with
a $7,000 grant from the St. Louis Park Community Foundation. St. Louis Park Friends of the Arts
provides technical assistance to the program and its recipients.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Award of the 2010 St. Louis Park Arts and Culture Grants follows the St. Louis Park Strategic
Directions 18-Month Guide adopted on March 19, 2007 by committing to promoting and
integrating arts, culture and community aesthetics in all City initiatives, including implementation
where appropriate.
Attachment: Resolution
Prepared by: Lisa Songle, Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
RESOLUTION NO. 10-___
MOTION TO AUTHORIZE AWARD OF ST. LOUIS PARK ARTS & CULTURE
GRANTS TO CHILDREN FIRST, STACIA GOODMAN, HARMONY THEATRE
COMPANY AND SCHOOL, MAGGIE’S FARM THEATER/SLP SENIOR PROGRAM,
MIXED PRECIPITION, THE PARK THEATER COMPANY, AND THE ST. LOUIS
PARK HIGH SCHOOL CHOIRS
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, the St. Louis Park Community Foundation and
Friends of the Arts worked together to create and support a $23,000 grant program to fund art
projects and cultural activities that build bridges between artists and communities, engage people in
creative learning, and promote artistic production and cultural experiences in St. Louis Park; and
WHEREAS, twenty applicants responded to the call for proposals and were evaluated by a
committee comprised of representatives of the St. Louis Park Community Foundation, St. Louis
Park Friends of the Arts, St. Louis Park Schools, the city, and community members; and
WHEREAS, the committee recommends the City Council fund seven (7) grant proposals
for a total of $22,802: Children First, Stacia Goodman, Harmony Theater Company and School,
Maggie’s Farm Theater/SLP Senior Program, Mixed Precipitation, The Park Theater Company and
the St. Louis Park High School Choirs.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, authorizes execution of grant agreements with the following organizations based on
the review committee’s recommendations and the applicants’ proposals.
1. Children First is awarded a maximum of $1,592.
2. Stacia Goodman is awarded a maximum of $5,000.
3. Harmony Theatre Company and School is awarded a maximum of $4,210.
4. Maggie’s Farm Theater/SLP Senior Program is awarded a maximum of $2,500.
5. Mixed Precipitation is awarded a maximum of $4,000.
6. The Park Theater Company is awarded a maximum of $2,500.
7. St. Louis Park Senior High School Choirs is awarded a maximum of $3,000.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 15, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4b
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:
Resolution Approving Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Approve Resolution amending and restating Resolution No. 09-053 adopted April 6,
2009 approving Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to proceed with amendments to Rules and Procedures for Boards and
Commissions?
BACKGROUND:
Council has the legal authority to create and manage all aspects of boards and commissions as set
forth in Section 2.02 of the Home Rule Charter. At the February 8, 2010 Study Session, Council
directed staff to draft policy language regarding commissioner conflicts of interest in the Rules and
Procedures for Boards and Commissions. Providing policy language will establish ethical standards
of conduct and require applicants to disclose potential conflicts of interest. In addition, Council
directed staff to revise the application to include questions regarding potential conflicts of interest
and length of residency.
At the March 8, 2010 Study Session, a written report was submitted to Council for review of the
proposed policy language regarding commissioner conflicts of interest. During that meeting,
discussion took place regarding clarification to other sections of the Rules and Procedures. It was the
consensus of the Council to revise Section I (Annual Report) to include a statement that the annual
report shall include a progress report on the previous year’s goals.
Staff is proposing the following policy language additions to be included in the Boards &
Commissions Rules and Procedures for your consideration:
I. Annual Report
Each board or commission shall prepare a draft written report for the Council which includes
activities undertaken in the past year, a progress report on the previous year’s goals, and goals for the
coming year. Every effort should be made to submit the report to the Council by January 1. After
reviewing the report, the Council may meet with the group in a study session to discuss the report
and other issues of concern to the commission prior to approving the report and, as needed, may
request the commission to also provide a. mid-year progress report.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
R. Conflict of Interest
No commissioner shall:
(1) Enter into any contractual arrangement with the city during the term serving as an appointed
board or commission member and for a period of one year after leaving office, unless authorized
by Minnesota Statutes § 471.88.
(2) Use their position to secure any special privilege or exemption for themselves or others.
(3) Use their office or otherwise act in any manner which would give the appearance of or result in
any impropriety or conflict of interest.
As requested by Council, the board and commission application will be updated to include
additional questions regarding length of residency and potential conflict of interest disclosure.
Housing Authority Annual Report
At the March 8 meeting a question was also raised regarding the Housing Authority’s Annual Report
to the City Council. According to the Section 10.1 of the Housing Authority Bylaws, “The
Authority will submit an annual report to the City Council summarizing the past year’s activities
and highlighting issues of concern and other information the Authority feels appropriate to convey
to the city council. The Authority chair or designee will prepare the report for approval by the
Authority. Authority members may submit signed addenda presenting alternative conclusions or
perspectives. The report and addenda are submitted with the current year work plan by April 1 or as
soon thereafter as possible.” The Housing Authority last reported to Council in May 2009.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Proposed Resolution
Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 10 -___
RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING
RESOLUTION NO. 09-053 ADOPTED APRIL 6, 2009
APPROVING RULES AND PROCEDURES
FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Council has established certain boards and
commissions to serve as advisory to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council wishes its various boards and commissions to comply with all
regulations to which they are subject concerning conduct of meetings including those provisions
contained in the Minnesota State Statutes, the City Charter and the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the attached rules and procedures serve as a guideline for operating those
boards and commissions and they set standards for the conduct of staff and commission members.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of St. Louis Park hereby amends
the “Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions” attached as Exhibit A and shall adhere to
the rules as stated therein unless revised by a majority vote of the City Council.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 15, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4b) Page 4
Resolution No. 10- ____ Exhibit A
Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions
Amending Resolution No. 09-053
Adopted by City Council March 15, 2010
A. Boards
The St. Louis Park City Charter grants the council authority to form various boards and
commissions by ordinance. Boards and commissions serve in an advisory capacity to the City
Council and are conferred various degrees of decision making power. The City Council is the sole
policy making body of the city. Some boards and commissions include in their membership persons
appointed by the school board.
Boards and commissions of the city which have been created by ordinance and are governed by the
provisions of these rules and procedures are as follows:
• Board of Zoning Appeals
• Human Rights Commission
• Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission
• Planning Commission
• Police Advisory Commission
• Telecommunications Advisory Commission
In addition, other ad hoc groups may be formed as needed by resolution of the council.
B. Staff Liaisons
Each board and commission is assigned a staff liaison. Duties of the staff liaison are, in general, to
facilitate or assist in the meetings, to record attendance and to provide information and direction as
requested by the commission. It is also the responsibility of the staff liaison to inform the city
council of any problems or issues that may arise.
C. Membership and Terms
Membership requirements are set by ordinance. All board and commission members are appointed
by the council or, in some cases, by the school board. Youth members may be appointed and are
conferred voting status except in the case of the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning
Appeals. Board and Commission members may not chair more than one commission at a time and
commissioners may only serve one consecutive year as chair.
D. Qualifications
Members must be St. Louis Park residents, but need not have expertise in any particular area.
Willingness to serve and be involved are the most important attributes of members. Per Resolution
#01-078, the city council will not consider applications for appointment to advisory commissions
from regular full-time or part-time St. Louis Park employees (as defined in the city’s personnel
manual). City Council will not consider applications for appointment to commissions from other
employees working for the city such as seasonal, temporary, part time, paid on call firefighters or
contract employees if such appointment could cause a conflict of interest.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4b) Page 5
E. Attendance
Regular attendance at meetings is a requirement for continued membership on any board or
commission. Irregular attendance and frequent absences are detrimental to the entire group and put
undue pressure on those members who do attend meetings. Regular attendance allows members to
learn about and discuss issues in depth which contributes to more effective decision making.
Continued absenteeism is considered grounds for dismissal by the council.
F. By-Laws
Each board and commission shall create by-laws and meeting procedures. By-laws must be consistent
with the City Code and should follow the Council’s template for by-laws. Whenever changes are
made, copies of the by-laws should be forwarded to the Administrative Services department for the
Council’s review. Council has 30 days to review and amend the by-laws per the City Code.
G. Meetings
Meeting times and locations are set according to each commission’s by-laws. Each commission
should defer to the Council’s meeting policy for meetings which occur on or near holidays. A
quorum of the board is made up of a majority of members currently appointed. All meetings will
be conducted in accordance with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law, the City Charter and the
Municipal Code of Ordinances. The proceedings of the meetings should be conducted using
standard parliamentary procedure. The City Council has adopted The Standard Code of
Parliamentary Procedure, as their guide and that publication is available in the Administrative
Services department. A simplified summary of these procedures is also available for use by
commission chairs and staff liaisons.
H. Minutes and other Records
Minutes of each meeting should be prepared and maintained by the staff liaison or designee.
Following commission approval minutes should be forwarded to the Administrative Services
department for placement on the city council agenda.
All board and commission records must be maintained in accordance with the city’s records
retention policy. Please contact the Administrative Services department if you have questions
regarding retention and preferred storage medium.
I. Annual Report
Each board or commission shall prepare a draft written report for the Council which includes
activities undertaken in the past year, a progress report on the previous year’s goals, and goals for the
coming year. Every effort should be made to submit the report to the Council by January 1. After
reviewing the report, the Council may meet with the group in a study session to discuss the report
and other issues of concern to the commission prior to approving the report and, as needed, may
request the Commission to also provide a. mid-year progress report.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4b) Page 6
J. Recruitment
When a vacancy occurs it is the responsibility of the staff liaison to inform the Administrative
Services department of the vacancy. Recruitment is typically done using any combination of
advertising opportunity available. Local newspaper, Park Perspective, direct mailing, neighborhood
newsletter, the city’s website, etc. are all acceptable forms of advertisement.
Applications are maintained by the Administrative Services department and are forwarded to
interested citizens upon request. In certain instances a supplemental application may be created to
determine suitability of candidates.
Upon receipt of the application a representative of the Administrative Services department will
contact the applicant to acknowledge receipt of the application and to discuss the interview and
appointment process.
Applications will be retained in the active file six months following receipt.
K. Candidate Review Process
Written applications are forwarded to Councilmembers for review as openings occur.
Councilmembers will inform the Administrative Services department of the candidates they wish to
interview based upon their review of written materials within two weeks of receiving the materials.
Interviews are conducted by the City Council, usually prior to a Monday evening meeting.
Following the interview, the Mayor will inform the Administrative Services department about the
status of each applicant. The Administrative Services department will mail a thank you letter to each
applicant with information regarding next steps in the process.
L. Appointment
Appointments are made by the City Council at a regular meeting of the council. Council will
inform the Administrative Services department when an appointment is to be made so that the
appointment can be added to the council agenda.
Following the appointment the Administrative Services department will contact the new member
and inform them of their appointment. A copy of the application will also be forwarded to the staff
liaison.
The staff liaison will provide the new member with meeting information and discuss expectations
and pertinent issues with them prior to the next meeting of the board or commission.
Appointments are sometimes made to unexpired terms, and often more than one vacancy exists on a
commission. In that case, the specific term occupied by the new member is determined by the
commission and communicated to the Administrative Services department.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4b) Page 7
M. Rosters
The staff liaison is responsible for keeping an updated roster of the commission which should
include contact information, term of office and date of appointment. The liaison is responsible for
notifying the Administrative Services department about roster changes.
N. Reappointment
Reappointments are made as needed by the city council. Performance and attendance by Board and
Commission members requesting reappointment will be considered by the Council. Council may
choose to re-interview any commission member as a means to determine whether the commission
member should continue to serve. A member may continue to serve beyond their expiration date
until a reappointment is made.
O. Resignation
When a resignation occurs, the staff liaison should contact the Administrative Services department
and forward a copy of any correspondence that may have been received. Administrative Services will
then initiate recruitment to fill the vacant position. A member may continue to serve beyond their
expiration date until a successor is appointed. Members may be removed with or without cause by
the City Council.
P. Recognition
At the beginning of each year the Council will recognize members who have left their position
during the prior year. Appreciation activities will be planned for all commission members on a
regular basis.
Q. Orientation
The Administrative Services department and the staff liaisons will provide orientation for new board
and commission members as well as new staff liaisons.
R. Conflict of Interest
No commissioner shall:
(1) Enter into any contractual arrangement with the city during the term serving as an appointed
board or commissioner member and for a period of one year after leaving office, unless
authorized by Minnesota statutes § 471.88.
(2) Use their position to secure any special privilege or exemption for themselves or others.
(3) Use their office or otherwise act in any manner which would give the appearance of or result in
any impropriety or conflict of interest.
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4c
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:
Resolution of Support for a Statewide Complete Streets Policy.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution expressing support of a Statewide Complete Streets Policy.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to express support for the Minnesota legislature to authorize the
development of a statewide Complete Streets program?
BACKGROUND:
Mayor Jeff Jacobs co-chairs Active Living Hennepin Communities and is a member of the Regional
Council of Mayors. Mayor Jacobs asked that staff prepare and present the attached resolution for
City Council consideration. Both Active Living Hennepin Communities and the Regional Council
of Mayors support the adoption of Complete Streets policies in Minnesota. The Complete Streets
concept promotes a system of streets that are safe and convenient for all users, including pedestrians,
bicyclists, transit riders, and motor vehicle drivers of all ages and abilities.
The St. Louis Park City Council recognizes the importance of Complete Streets, as shown in its
2009 Comprehensive Plan Update. Encouraging the State of Minnesota to incorporate Complete
Streets into its policies will help provide for the development of a balanced transportation system,
through appropriate planning, that integrates multiple transportation modes, where appropriate, for
transportation users of all types, ages and abilities.
Attached for your information is some background information related to Complete Streets, the
benefits of Complete Streets, and excerpts from the City of St. Louis Park’s Comprehensive Plan
regarding Compete Streets.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
VISION CONSIDERATION:
City of St. Louis Park is a connected and engaged community. City of St. Louis Park is a leader in
environmental stewardship.
Attachments: Proposed Resolution
Background Related to Complete Streets (Source: Minnesota Complete
Streets Coalition)
Benefits of Complete Streets (Source: Minnesota Complete Streets Coalition)
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4c) Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 10-______
RESOLUTION EXPRESSING SUPPORT OF A STATEWIDE
COMPLETE STREETS POLICY
WHEREAS, the “Complete Streets” concept promotes streets that are safe and convenient
for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and motor vehicle drivers of all ages and
abilities; and
WHEREAS, the October 2009 public draft of the Minnesota Department of
Transportation Complete Streets Report includes the recommendation: “Mn/DOT should build on
existing Context Sensitive Solution practices and develop and implement a statewide Complete
Streets policy…”; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Council recognizes the importance of complete streets,
as shown in its 2009 Comprehensive Plan update;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park encourages the Minnesota legislature, with input and guidance from the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, to authorize the development of a statewide Complete Streets
program, which would provide for the development of a balanced transportation system, through
appropriate planning, that integrates multiple transportation modes, where appropriate, for
transportation users of all types, ages and abilities.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 15, 2010
City Manager
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4c) Page 4
Background Related to Complete Streets
• Complete Streets is a flexible transportation planning and design process that considers the safety
and accessibility needs of all users. Complete Streets is not a prescriptive roadway design.
Individual “complete” street designs vary based on context, including topography, road function,
the speed of traffic, pedestrian and bicycle demand, local land use, and other factors.
• State Senator Tony Lourey (Kerrick) and State Representative Mike Obermueller (Eagan)
introduced Complete Streets legislation during the 2010 legislative session [S.F. 2461 and H.F.
2801]
• The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) is working to create a partnership of
state agencies, local governments, and other stakeholders to develop and implement a Mn/DOT
policy on Complete Streets.
• In December 2009, Mn/DOT released a legislatively mandated Complete Streets Report, which
includes a recommendation for Mn/DOT to work in partnership with representatives of relevant
stakeholders to develop a Complete Streets policy. The report also articulates the important
connection between Complete Streets and Context-Sensitive Solutions, which together support
building roads that better fit local needs and contexts and help save money.
• Mn/DOT Commissioner Thomas Sorel has spoken publicly about the benefits of Complete
Streets and his commitment to taking a leadership role on implementation of a Complete Streets
policy.
• Between 1999 and 2008, 417 pedestrians and 84 bicyclists were killed and more than 10,000
pedestrians and more than 9,000 bicyclists were injured on Minnesota’s roads.
• Complete Streets is a national movement with policies adopted by 12 states and more than 100
cities and counties, including Rochester, Hennepin County, St. Paul, and Albert Lea.
• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Minnesota Department of Health, Blue Cross
and Blue Shield of Minnesota, American Heart Association, HealthPartners, and other public
health officials in Minnesota and across the country have called for Complete Streets as an
important public health tool in fighting the obesity epidemic by supporting exercise as a part of
daily life.
• The Complete Streets concept is also supported by AARP, Urban Land Institute of Minnesota,
Minnesota Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities, Minnesota Environmental Partnership,
and many other transportation, planning, and public health professionals. The Minnesota
Complete Streets Coalition has more than 45 member organizations that support the concept of
Complete Streets and a state Complete Streets policy.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4c) Page 5
Benefits of Complete Streets
• Complete Streets improves safety by reducing crashes and injuries and their costs.
• Complete Streets removes barriers to transportation facilities and services for seniors, children,
and people with disabilities, allowing them to lead more active and independent lives.
• A state Complete Streets policy will give local governments more flexibility to build roads that
meet the needs in their community.
• Complete Streets promotes public health by supporting exercise as a part of daily life.
• Complete Streets helps avoid costly future retrofits by making sure that we build roads right the
first time.
• Complete Streets supports affordable transportation options for families.
• Complete Streets reduces congestion by providing safe travel choices that encourage non-
motorized transportation options, increasing the overall capacity of the transportation network.
• Complete Streets supports more pedestrian, bicycle, and transit travel, which helps protect clean
air and clean water and reduces our dependence on costly energy sources.
• Complete Streets promotes economic growth and community stability by providing accessible
and efficient connections between home, school, work, recreation, and retail destinations by
improving the pedestrian and vehicular environments throughout communities.
• Complete Streets supports vibrant and walkable neighborhoods that improve quality of life and
help build community.
For more information:
www.mncompletestreets.org
Ethan Fawley, Fresh Energy and the Minnesota Complete Streets Coalition
ethan.fawley@fresh-energy.org
651-294-7141
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
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:
Final Payment Resolution - Contract 86-09 Valley Paving, Inc. – Project No. 2009-2101.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $19,660.82 and accepting
work for the traffic signal at W. 36th Street and Park Center Boulevard with Valley Paving, Inc.
Project No. 2009-2101, City Contract No. 86-09.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND:
City Council approved and authorized traffic signal revisions at W. 36th Street and Park Center
Boulevard – City Project No. 2009-2101 which was advertised, bid, and awarded to Valley Paving,
Inc. on July 6, 2009 in the amount of $143,732.25. This project included improvements to the
traffic control signal and the intersection at W. 36th Street and Park Center Boulevard in order to
allow full access to the LA Fitness site at that intersection.
On November 2, 2009 the City Manager approved Change Order No. 1 in the amount of
$6,055.38 for extra work to install an addition conduit to the traffic control box.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The project cost will be 100% assessed to the LA Fitness Center Developer, PBK Investments (7 &
41 LLC). The City has funds in place to finance the cost of the special assessment.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 10-___
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $19,660.82 AND ACCEPTING THE WORK FOR THE
REVISED TRAFFIC SIGNAL - W. 36TH STREET AT PARK CENTER BOULEVARD
WITH VALLEY PAVING, INC.
CITY PROJECT NO. 2009-2101
CONTRACT NO. 86-09
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as
follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated July 6, 2009, Valley Paving, Inc. has
satisfactorily completed the Traffic Signal – W. 36th Street at Park Center Boulevard contract, as per
Contract No. 86-09.
2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the
work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Original Contract Price $ 143,732.25
Change Order 6,055.38
Underrun 457.80
Contract Amount $ 149,329.83
Previous Payments 129,669.01
Balance Due $ 19,660.82
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 15, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4e
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 27, 2010 through March 12,
2010.
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
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
1Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,050.00INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING10,000 LAKES CHAPTER
1,050.00
340.00INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING10,000 LAKES CHAPTER ICC
340.00
10,000.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A COLLECTED BY CITY7 & 41 LLC
10,000.00
150.52BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYA-OK EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY CO
150.52
506.89GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY INC
14,250.71STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT
14,757.60
3.59-WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSACCUITY INC
55.84WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
3.59-SEWER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
55.84SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
3.60-SOLID WASTE BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
55.85SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
3.59-STORM WATER UTILITY BAL SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
55.84STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
209.00
507.56PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYACTION FLEET INC
885.38GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE
1,392.94
604.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTAD STRATEGIES
604.00
51.56-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSAIR CHEK INC
801.56INSPECTIONS G & A MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE
750.00
4.23FAMILY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIESALMSTEAD'S SUPERVALU
4.23
62.06PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS
62.06
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 2
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
2Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
87.90GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER
143.52PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
90.66PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
77.67ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
94.06VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
75.10WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
75.10SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
644.01
162.72FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESANDERSEN INC, EARL
162.72
193.10MUNICIPAL BLDG RENTAL BUILDINGSAPPLIANCE RECYCLING CENTERS
193.10
295.58GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYARAMARK UNIFORM CORP ACCTS
257.12ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
552.70
32.57COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONEAT&T
32.57
60.03SCHOOL LIASON TRAININGBAHR, KURT
60.03
89.74GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESBATTERIES PLUS
89.74
253.50OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESBOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC
253.50
2.78PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYBOYER TRUCK PARTS
2.78
97.24HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLEBROOKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN
97.24
1,795.50SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESBROWN TRAFFIC PRODUCTS
1,795.50
145.35INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBRUHN, AMBER
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 3
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
3Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
145.35
4,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWBUECHLER, DANIEL & KRISTIANNE
4,000.00
1,594.57DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE
1,594.57
60.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATCEAM
120.00ENGINEERING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
180.00
600.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT
600.00
403.60GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY
403.60
10,400.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S OTHER RETIREMENTCENTRAL PENSION FUND
10,400.00
891.71BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICECERTIFIED PLUMBING INC
891.71
300.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCHERICO, MATTHEW
300.00
350.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCHURCHILL, LEE
350.00
78.01GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESCINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY
98.65WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
176.66
30.00ASSESSING G & A TRAININGCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK
28.00FINANCE G & A MEETING EXPENSE
51.20POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT
469.38SCHOOL LIASON TRAVEL/MEETINGS
1,390.00ERUTRAINING
28.46OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
1,997.04
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 4
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
4Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
242.26INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOLBORN, CHRISTINE
242.26
18,054.85ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICESCOLICH & ASSOCIATES
18,054.85
159.95NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES DATACOMMUNICATIONSCOMCAST
159.95
292.89CE MATERIALS TESTING IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDICOMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION
292.89
512.50EMERGENCY REPAIR GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP S
512.50
100.00NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCRAZY LIKE A FOX FILMS LLC
100.00
212.44POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIESCUB FOODS
212.44
27.27VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESCUMMINS NPOWER LLC
27.27
306.17WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESDAKOTA SUPPLY GROUP
306.17
391.72PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYDEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC
391.72
2,081.02INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTSDEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY
2,081.02
67.00WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESDEPT NATURAL RESOURCES
2,000.00PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
2,067.00
846.36POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC
846.36
245.00FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATEHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC
245.00
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 5
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
5Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
2,992.91WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEELECTRIC PUMP INC
2,992.91
988.59TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEEMERY'S TREE SERVICE INC
988.59
93.71PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYEQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTION MANAGEM
93.71
344.93PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO
344.93
8.09PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESFASTENAL COMPANY
8.09
64.79POLICE G & A DELIVERYFEDEX
64.79
428.46ICE RESURFACER MOTOR FUELSFERRELLGAS
428.46
23.57PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYFORCE AMERICA INC
23.57
10,000.00NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESFRIENDS OF THE ARTS
10,000.00
304.00ARENA MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEGARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC
304.00
185.00POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEGRAGE, ANDREA
185.00
308.09GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESGRAINGER INC, WW
42.24PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORY
214.67PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
136.87PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
701.87
600.00APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICE COMPUTER SERVICESGREEN, HOWARD R COMPANY
600.00
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 6
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
6Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
48.00YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEHATCHER, CARI
48.00
6,726.24WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESHAWKINS INC
6,726.24
54.11WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESHEGNA, JESSICA
54.11
175.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENDERSON, TRACY
175.00
2,061.98POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF
2,061.98
6,231.75POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER
72.07PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
315.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
6,618.82
2,971.40SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEHIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC
2,971.40
103.71WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESHIRSHFIELDS
103.71
19.82GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHOME HARDWARE
45.69PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
6.40TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
71.91
1,102.46PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICEHOPKINS, CITY OF
1,102.46
430.11WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSI&D 14-93 LP
430.11
133.50OPERATIONSTRAININGICC
133.50
6,120.63PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEIKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 7
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
7Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
6,120.63
400.00TRAININGTRAININGINDEPENDENT ELECTRICAL CONSULT
400.00
2,406.70FACILITY OPERATIONS TELEPHONEINTEGRA TELECOM
2,406.70
21.55PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYINTERSTATE POWER SYSTEMS INC
21.55
249.61PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESINTL SECURITY PRODUCTS
249.61
58.00FITNESS PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEJACHNYCKY, FRANCES
58.00
300.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEJM CONSULTING LTD
300.00
8,970.00MUNICIPAL BLDG RENTAL BUILDINGSJORGENSON CONSTRUCTION INC
8,970.00
20.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAININGJRK SEED & SURG SUPPLY
20.00
14,429.18ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKASSA CONSTRUCTION, RON
3,190.74CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
17,619.92
64.00FITNESS PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEKEMMER, JOYCE
64.00
167.63HOUSING REHAB BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTS PAYABLEKILMER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC
167.63
8.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEKOTTKE, KATHRYN
8.00
66.80PATCHING TEMPORARY EQUIPMENT PARTSLAKES GAS CO
281.64PATCHING TEMPORARY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES
42.99VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 8
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
8Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
391.43
92.26PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYLARSON COMPANIES LTD INC, WD
92.26
40.67SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESLARSON, JH CO
40.67
80.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATLEAGUE OF MN CITIES
4,250.00POLICE G & A TRAINING
20.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS
4,350.00
325.15UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSLEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE
325.15
87.00ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARLEE, KATIE
87.00
1,376.00HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESLEXIS NEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS INC
1,376.00
121.65POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLEXISNEXIS
121.65
543.17PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYLITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC
543.17
33.81IT G & A TELEPHONELOGIS
27,633.80POSTAL SERVICES COMPUTER SERVICES
39,969.00APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICE COMPUTER SERVICES
6,120.00NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES COMPUTER SERVICES
12,562.36TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT
86,318.97
430.45PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYLUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC
430.45
1,512.73ACCIDENT REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMAACO AUTO PAINTING
1,512.73
37.50BROOMBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMADISON, CHARLES
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 9
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
9Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
37.50
587.50BROOMBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMADISON, DANIEL
587.50
91.84FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESMENARDS
46.12BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE GENERAL SUPPLIES
9.89WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
147.85
258.45OPERATIONSEQUIPMENT PARTSMETRO FIRE INC
258.45
424.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMETRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS
424.00
29,106.00INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTSMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL
4,247.41WATER UTILITY G&A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
33,353.41
44.84SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESMICRO CENTER
44.84
4,362.17PATCHING TEMPORARY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESMIDWEST ASPHALT CORP
4,362.17
740.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMIDWEST TESTING LLC
740.00
1,040.00PAWN FEES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT
1,040.00
175.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAININGMINNEAPOLIS, CITY OF
175.00SUPERVISORYTRAINING
350.00
100.00ENGINEERING G & A TRAININGMINNESOTA ASPHALT PAVEMENT ASS
100.00
495.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAININGMINNESOTA CIT OFFICER'S ASSN
495.00
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 10
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
10Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
150.00PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIMINNESOTA DEPT HEALTH
150.00
126.64VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESMINNESOTA TRUCKING ASSOC
126.64
106.88OPERATIONSTRAININGMNFIAM BOOK SALES
106.88
140.25INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMOREAU, NATALIE
140.25
2,625.68ACCIDENT REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMORRIE'S BODYWORKS
2,625.68
1,707.15COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMOTOROLA
1,707.15
100.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTMRPA
100.00
60.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSMUNICIPALS
60.00
1,285.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWMUNZO, AMANDA & HAZZEN
1,285.00
250.00REILLY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMVTL LABORATORIES
250.00
708.34PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)
450.61VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES
1,158.95
55.58HOCKEYGENERAL SUPPLIESNEW HOPE, CITY OF
55.58
40.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAININGNORTHSTAR CHAPTER APA
40.00
500.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESOAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL
500.00
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 11
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
11Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
70.88WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESOESTREICH, MARK
70.88
92.89FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT
96.83POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
145.75POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
16.54NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
60.11OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES
20.06PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
102.90ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
20.06PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
20.06VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
149.89SEWER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES
725.09
1,398.24INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESOFFICE TEAM
1,398.24
16,809.83TREE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESOSTVIG TREE INC
16,809.83
288.75INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPAPP, MELISSA
288.75
500.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNTPARKTACULAR
500.00
32.00POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGSPETTY CASH
13.70OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES
16.07OPERATIONSEQUIPMENT PARTS
9.65PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
11.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT
19.51PUBLIC WORKS G & A MEETING EXPENSE
26.97SAFETY SERVICES MEETING EXPENSE
21.00TRAININGMEETING EXPENSE
5.33ENGINEERING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES
9.64ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES
20.00TRAININGMEETING EXPENSE
6.96SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES
191.83
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 12
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
12Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
564.94INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPOLK, MARLA
564.94
360.60PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONEPOPP TELECOM
360.60
20,000.00POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEPOSTMASTER - PERMIT #603
276.50WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
276.50SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
276.50SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
276.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
21,106.00
16.00HOLIDAY PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEPOWELL, RACHEL
16.00
90.00ICE RESURFACER EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEPRINTERS SERVICE INC
90.00
48.51VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGEQUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER
48.51
2,098.21FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICERANDY'S SANITATION INC
946.28REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
92.24WATER UTILITY G&A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
701.44SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
3,838.17
70.54WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGERAPID GRAPHICS & MAILING
70.53SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
70.54SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE
70.54STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE
282.15
223.86SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIREED CONSTRUCTION DATA
223.86
945.79PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICERICOH AMERICAS CORP
47.29NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES
993.08
1,800.00GENERAL FUND G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRIGHT MANAGEMENT INC
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 13
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
13Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,800.00
126.00FITNESS PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEROG, MARGARET
126.00
173.20ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARROSA, NATE
173.20
164.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHMIDT, KELLIE
164.00
200.00WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESENUS METERING SYSTEMS
200.00
330.08INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSIMMONS, DENISE
330.08
560.00POLICE G & A TRAININGSOTA
560.00
2,239.44DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES DATACOMMUNICATIONSSPRINT
2,239.44
102.07PATCHING TEMPORARY GENERAL SUPPLIESSPS COMPANIES INC
102.07
2,493.13PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSRF CONSULTING GROUP INC
7,660.71CE DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI
10,153.84
10,593.05NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES DATACOMMUNICATIONSST LOUIS PARK SCHOOLS
10,593.05
174.71WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSSTEFANICH, JOHN
174.71
56.37PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSTONEBROOKE EQUIPMENT INC
56.37
184.68PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESSTORAGE EQUIPMENT INC
184.68
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 14
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
14Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
58.77PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSTREICHER'S
58.77
318.19ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS
53.63CDBG G & A LEGAL NOTICES
371.82
1,714.00MUNICIPAL BLDG BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESSUNDE LAND SURVEYING LLC
1,714.00
898.62GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESUPERIOR FORD
898.62
950.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSWEELEY, DAVID
950.00
2,000.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTEENS ALONE
2,000.00
2,217.55NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTENNEN, DENISE
2,217.55
138.55VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESTERMINAL SUPPLY CO
138.55
54.71GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESTERMINIX INT
74.56BRICK HOUSE (1324)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
74.55WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
97.00BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE
300.82
256.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTHOMPSON, HOLLY
256.00
216.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTHOMPSON, MEGAN
216.00
397.63ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL
397.63
1,083.96ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICESTKDA
1,083.96
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 15
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
15Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
10,000.00RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDITORGERSON, CLIFFORD
10,000.00
34.38-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSTOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC
534.38GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES
500.00
65.00FITNESS PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUETREGO, MARY
65.00
46.98PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYTRI STATE BOBCAT
46.98
325.00NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCETRIANGLE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN
325.00
990.00SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTWIN CITY OUTDOOR SERVICES INC
348.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
1,338.00
660.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA REGIST
660.00
110.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESUNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS
110.00
22.91VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGEUPS STORE
22.91
31.18WATER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONEUSA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC
31.18
103.50HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITIONVAIL, LORI
103.50
100.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESVANG, WILLIAM
100.00
116.50ENVIRONMENTAL G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARVAUGHAN, JIM
116.50
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 16
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
16Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
1,266.73VOICE SYSTEM MTCE TELEPHONEVERIZON WIRELESS
73.12COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONE
1,339.85
370.92GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESVIKING DISCOUNT BLINDS
370.92
75.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWARREN, DEVIN
75.00
69.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSWASTE & RECYCLING NEWS
69.00
54,442.95SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICEWASTE MANAGEMENT
23,760.75SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE
23,793.20SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE
1,369.72SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE
103,366.62
327.63CONCESSIONS/HOCKEY ASSOC CONCESSION SUPPLIESWATSON CO INC
327.63
250.00BASKETBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWELDON, DAN
250.00
305.60INSPECTIONS G & A ELECTRICALWEST STAR ELECTRIC
305.60
83.04PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYWHEELER'S AUTOBODY SUPPLY
5.34-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS
77.70
70.00FITNESS PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEWIESE, SHIRLEY
70.00
1,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWWILLEY, BOB
1,000.00
858.20MUNICIPAL BLDG RENTAL BUILDINGSWILLIAMS SCOTSMAN INC
858.20
365.00AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSWORLD WATERPARK ASSOC
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 17
3/10/2010CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:51:34R55CKSUM LOG23000VO
17Page -Council Check Summary
3/12/2010 -2/27/2010
Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object
365.00
10,199.59ENTERPRISE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY
10,199.59
2,748.96TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENTXIOTECH CORP
2,748.96
6,860.00UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSXTERIOR XPERTS
6,860.00
16,034.90PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYYOCUM OIL CO INC
16,034.90
1,834.94PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYZIEGLER INC
1,834.94
Report Totals 543,800.20
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4e)Page 18
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4f
City of St. Louis Park
Human Rights Commission
Minutes – January 19, 2010
Westwood Room, City Hall
I. Call to Order
Chair Lyon called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m.
A. Roll Call
Commissioners Present: Mohamed Abdi, Jonathan Awasom, Bill Gavzy, Sharon Lyon, Jeff
Mueller, Stuart Morgan, Vladimir Sivriver, Isabella Stewart and Shelley T Weier
Staff: Marney Olson, Lt. Lori Dreier and Amy Stegora-Peterson
B. Approval of Agenda
It was moved by Commissioner Morgan, seconded by Commissioner Abdi, to approve the
agenda as presented.
The motion passed 8-0.
C. Approval of Minutes
It was moved by Commissioner Abdi, seconded by Commissioner Morgan, to approve the
minutes of December 15, 2009, as presented.
The motion passed 8-0.
II. Commissioner and Committee Reports
A. Individual commissioner and staff reports
Lt. Dreier reported there were four Bias Crime reports in 2009.
III. Sub Committee Reports – Diversity Lens/Outreach
Ms. Olson indicated she asked the Communications Department to look at creating a new
brochure, which includes promotion of the Diversity Lens and the new marketing and
branding for the City. They have new staff, so had not been able to complete it. When she
gets the draft, she will get Commissioner feedback at the sub-committee meeting and bring
to the next HRC meeting.
IV. Divestment Resolution
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Commissioner Gavzy stated he was going to put something in writing for City Council to tie
the Resolution to the Commissions mission, but wasn’t able to tie the two together. They
might want to consider reviewing the Commission’s mission statement.
Ms. Olson stated if the Commission chose to submit a Resolution, it would go to the
Council when the Commission submitted their annual report. They will also present their
Work Plan at that time. The Study Session is on February 22nd and the Council may invite
Commissioners to the March 8th Study Session.
The Commission took a vote to determine if they wanted to submit a Resolution to the City
Council. It was approved on a vote of 6-1-1.
V. 2010 Work Plan, Annual Report and Bylaws
Ms. Olson noted the 2010 Work Plan was based on the 2009 Work Plan with a couple of
changes in the community events. She was unsure if they wanted to keep the film series on
the Work Plan. Another change was adding work on the City School calendar.
Commissioners wanted to continue with the Film Series and keep it on the Work Plan.
Commissioners Sivriver and Mueller volunteered to be on the Film Series sub committee.
Commissioner Weier noted she would help as long as possible.
Ms. Olson stated the City advertises in new ways including Facebook, Twitter and on-line
Park Perspectives.
Commissioner Gavzy suggested they add an item to include evaluating the mission
statement.
Commissioner Sivriver suggested meetings with other Human Rights commissions.
Ms. Olson stated the Work Plan and Annual Report would go to City Council before their
next meeting. The Annual Report would include the Divestment Resolution. They can
include discussing By-laws and the possibility of reducing the number of meetings from
twelve to nine and consider eliminating meetings in June, July and November. City Council
approves any changes to the Bylaws.
VI. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:08 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Amy L. Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4g
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
December 2, 2009--6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Andrew Ford (youth member),
Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris,
Carl Robertson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Richard Person, Larry Shapiro
STAFF PRESENT: Meg McMonigal, Kevin Locke, Brian Swanson, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of October 21, 2009
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to recommend approval of the minutes of
October 21, 2009. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on
a vote of 5-0.
3. Other Business
A. 2010-14 Capital Improvement Plan – Conformity with Comprehensive Plan
Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, provided background on the
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). She introduced Brian Swanson, Finance
Manager, who was available to answer questions.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about railroad crossing section signal and
bus shelter on page six.
Mr. Swanson responded that both are scheduled replacement costs.
Commissioner Carper asked about City efforts towards green initiatives.
Mr. Swanson spoke about the City’s mission and vision in environmental initiatives
in city buildings and projects.
Ms. McMonigal added that a lot of attention has been paid to city vehicles and
equipment as well as looking at buildings for energy efficiencies.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion finding that the 2010-14 Capital
Improvement Plan is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
4. Hearings
A. 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 09-06-CP
Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report. She provided background on the intent of a
city’s plan, new items and changes in the 2030 plan, the process, neighborhood planning and
input, business and property owner input, and implementation.
Ms. McMonigal spoke about land use areas, in particular areas which need attention and
future study, including commercial nodes and corridors. She said staff has been doing a lot
of work on Southwest LRT Transit. Three station areas will be located in St. Louis Park:
Beltline, Wooddale, and Louisiana stations. Some planning has begun with Hennepin
County about the sites. In looking at the station sites they’ve considered land use, access,
circulation, parking, building, and zoning guidelines very generally, and are starting to move
to a more specific level.
She spoke about the future land use map contained in the Comprehensive Plan. She
discussed land use changes proposed. She stated that the Comprehensive Plan map sets the
overall uses, not zoning. Zoning determines specific uses, setbacks, height, density and
other specific requirements, and would follow later.
Ms. McMonigal spoke about the creation of a new Business Park (BP) category which came
from looking at the station areas in particular and trying to determine the most appropriate
uses for the areas around the stations as they will receive a lot of real estate pressure in the
future. It is expected that light rail transit will be operational at the earliest in 2016. Staff
looked at the existing uses and character, the market desire, and the needs. They also looked
at future for industrial uses. In the market study completed for industrial areas, it showed
the uses appropriate for the area include office showroom, engineering, technology, medical,
etc. Business Park was created primarily near light rail stations to accommodate a wider
variety of uses.
Ms. McMonigal spoke about proposed changes to 7202 and 7252 Excelsior Boulevard. The
property owner, Weis Builders, has objected to the change from High Density Residential to
Business Park. Their letter was attached to the staff report which Commissioners received.
The adjacent property, Appliance Recycling, is proposed to change from Industrial to
Business Park. She added that in the last few months it has been purchased by the neighbor
to the west, Japs Olson. Japs Olson is an industrial use and would like the Appliance Smart
site to remain as industrial at this time.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 3
The Minikahda Mini-storage site at 3200 France is proposed to change from Industrial to
High Density Residential. Ms. McMonigal said several neighbors in the Minikahda Oaks
neighborhood have been in touch with staff regarding their opposition to the proposed
change.
Ms. McMonigal spoke about changes proposed to the Beltline station area. She also spoke
about change proposed for the area north of the mini-storage site from Industrial to Business
Park.
Ms. McMonigal gave several examples of high density and medium density residential for
reference.
Ms. McMonigal discussed proposed changes in the Elmwood area. The changes are
consistent with the Elmwood Land Use Plan which was completed 6-8 years ago. The
proposed changes would be putting that plan into place.
Chair Kramer noted that the Planning Commission has held several study sessions where all
of the topics covered by Ms. McMonigal have been discussed in detail. Many of the
Planning Commission’s questions have been answered previously.
Commissioner Carper asked about heights allowed for medium and high density residential.
Ms. McMonigal said the Comprehensive Plan designations are for land use change, not
zoning, but under the current zoning (Industrial Park) the height limit is 75 ft. Under High
Density Residential the height limit is 75 ft., medium density depends on the exact category
but generally 3 stories or 40 ft. (R-4 district).
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said 75 ft. would be 6-7 stories.
Commissioner Carper asked about proposed changes in access to the mini-storage site.
Ms. McMonigal said currently access is only from France Ave. Property would have to be
acquired from an adjacent property owner to accomplish access from Park Glen, which is a
possibility in the future.
Chair Kramer opened the public hearing.
Morris Sherman, attorney, representing Japs Olson, 7500 Excelsior Blvd., discussed the
parcel and the business which employs 650 people. He said Japs Olson is the second largest
employer in St. Louis Park, with a diverse employment base, high hourly wage, and limited
parking. It exists under a variance which allows 586 parking spaces. His client needs to
expand on a contiguous basis. To expand they have to replace the parking.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 4
He said about one year ago the company attempted to buy the Kunz Oil site located
immediately west of Japs Olson in Hopkins. At that time Hopkins had its Comprehensive
Plan under review and proposed to zone the Kunz Oil site from Industrial to Business Park.
Hopkins refused to allow Japs Olson to tear down an obsolete building and use it for
parking. Four months ago Japs Olson was contacted by Appliance Recyling Company
proposing that Japs Olson buy their building and lease it back to Appliance Recycling.
Discussions were held with City staff about proposed plans to purchase the building and
expand on the parcel and use it for the parking which is permitted in an Industrial zone.
Japs Olson bought the building. Bob Murphy, Japs Olson, said he was completely unaware
of the proposed Comprehensive Plan changes. They bought the building, leased it back to
Appliance Smart for five years and now have the option to expand their building in St. Louis
Park, expand jobs, and expand the tax base.
Mr. Murphy received a letter from the City on November 20th, which was the first time they
had heard about the change. Mr. Sherman said St. Louis Park would be specifically zoning
a 9 ½ acre parcel out of the context in which it exists. Mr. Sherman said Japs Olson urges
the Commission to leave the parcel as industrial as that is what will allow Japs Olson to grow
in the community.
Chair Kramer asked Ms. McMonigal to clarify how Business Park is different than Industrial
and how that would prevent the desired parking.
Ms. McMonigal responded that they wouldn’t be prevented from having parking there.
However, they are an industrial use and so the idea is that they would like all of their
property to remain industrial at this time in the event they expanded their building or used
that site for something other than parking.
Mr. Sherman said Japs Olson wants to be able to build a contiguous building, fill the 27
acres immediately to the west and use this in its entirety for parking. It would be screened,
landscaped, and meet all requirements.
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director, said part of the reason Mr. Sherman got
an indication from staff that it would be suitable for Japs Olson to consider the Appliance
Smart property is because it would be a reasonable use for that property, even with the
Business Park designation. He went on to say that St. Louis Park hasn’t written a Business
Park Zoning District category yet because it is at the broader level of planning with the
Comprehensive Plan. The description of Business Park includes light industrial uses. Mr.
Locke said the point was to come up with a district that allowed for good, clean industry like
Japs Olson but didn’t get to be so broad to include the kind of industrial uses that create
problems.
Peter Worthington, representing Weis Builders, owners of 7200-7202-7250-7252 Excelsior
Blvd. referenced his May 18, 2009 letter to the Planning Commission expressing Weis’
concern about changing from High Density Residential to Business Park. He said there is
very little buildable land on the four parcels and because of the configuration of the wetlands
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 5
they really are an island with a small footprint for buildable land. He said this calls out for a
high density residential use. Mr. Worthington said Weis Builders thinks that would be
consistent with Livable Communities goals.
Brian Johnson, 3345 Glenhurst, read a letter dated Dec. 2, 2009 from Wendy Skinner, 3336
Huntington Ave. S. Ms. Skinner stated she supported the proposed reguiding of the
Minikahda Mini-storage site, 3200 France Ave. S., from Industrial to High Density with
reservations and recommendations. She stated she was deeply concerned about increased
traffic on France Ave. from Randall Ave. to the France/Excelsior intersection. She strongly
urged the Commission to consider the following condition to future development at the site:
Require that access to the future high density development be created exclusively at
the end of Park Glen Road. This will align with the present apartment,
condominium, and office/industrial developments along Park Glen Road. Then,
make France Avenue a dead end to all motor traffic at Randall Avenue.
Mr. Johnson said he supported the idea of creating livable communities and providing a
variety of housing options. He asked the Commission to carefully and honestly consider the
impact of making the proposed change to the Minikahda Mini-storage site on the
surrounding neighborhoods. He said throughout the planning stages of the Ellipse
development he voiced his concern about the unintended consequences that adding multi-
family housing adjacent to single family residences would have. He said although traffic
studies were conducted, he believes the traffic issue of the neighborhood continues to be
misunderstood or at least not given the attention it deserves. He said he believes the island
buffer that will be added at the entrance of the neighborhood will significantly reduce the
amount of traffic from the Ellipse development.
Mr. Johnson stated that Ellipse traffic would pale in comparison to traffic generated from a
high density residential development that utilized France as the access point. He said
residents in the Minikahda Vista neighborhood would also be significantly impacted. He
summarized by saying he could not support any development, including Business Park, at
the site that would use France as the access point. He said access changes should be made
now before it is too late.
Commissioner Robertson asked about approximate number of units for both medium and
high density, considering setbacks and other requirements.
Ms. McMonigal responded medium density is up to 30 units per acre and the site is
approximately 10 acres. High density category is up to 50 units and up to 75 with a
Planned Unit Development. Those numbers do not take into consideration setbacks,
required open space, and driveways.
Commissioner Robertson said the potential number of units would be approximately 250 –
500.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 6
Frank Steck, 4121 Randall Ave., asked why the site would be attractive to the city for
medium or high density residential.
Ms. McMonigal replied in the next 5-6 years there will be a lot of pressure on properties in
the station areas. She said that there is the potential that some of these properties will change
over the next several years. The Minikahda Mini-storage site is a low intensity use currently
which makes it more attractive for redevelopment. In anticipation of that, the idea was to
look for that transition from residential to another use. If another use was allowed in the
Industrial district, it could be a use with industrial impacts and the intent was to look at
transitioning from single family to multi-family to Business Park in that area to reduce the
impacts on the neighborhood.
Mr. Steck said it would be an eight block walk to the station. He spoke about the
Minikahda Oaks neighborhood being one of the oldest neighborhoods with a strong
association. He said it is a special pocket and residents paid a fair amount of money for that
experience and they are seeing a lot of that eroding with the Ellipse development, light rail
and other growth. A medium or high density development would be an erosion of the
neighborhood’s quality of life. Mr. Steck said traffic is a real concern. Only France Ave.
has sidewalks in the neighborhood and the street has become the sidewalk. Many drivers
do not realize that France Ave. isn’t a through street and they leave France Ave. at 40-50
mph because they are irritated. This happens frequently.
Mr. Steck spoke about parking in the street. He discussed privacy which has been eroded
because of the Ellipse development. To have the other side of the neighborhood flanked by a
medium to high density residential development is not palatable. He suggested a one to two
story development might have a chance. He hopes the neighborhood can make an
impression on the Commission to preserve what St. Louis Park has in this neighborhood and
other neighborhoods.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked Mr. Johnson and Mr. Steck for their
recommendations for the property.
Mr. Steck suggested more green space. He said the neighborhood is concerned about the
noise of light rail. He said Bass Lake preserve is mostly weeds now. If not green space, he
suggested any development should be one or two stories. The status quo is just fine.
Mr. Johnson stated he seconded Mr. Steck’s recommendation of one-two stories, whether it
is office or housing. He said his main point is to close off France permanently, now, which
would force a way to have an entrance at Park Glen.
Scott Carpenter, 3924 Randall, said he is concerned about the number of vehicle counts on
France Ave. with high density. He suggested with 500 units/three trips per day, there could
be 1500 vehicle trips daily on France. Ave. He read from the zoning guidelines for multi-
family dwellings regarding access. “Access shall be from a roadway identified in the
Comprehensive Plan as a collector or arterial or shall otherwise be located so that access can
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 7
be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets.” He asked how
access, zoning and guiding are compatible. He asked if the City is holding the possibility
that there would be an eminent domain taking of Park Glen property.
Ms. McMonigal responded that a property owner would have to acquire property in order to
extend the street in that area.
Commissioner Robertson asked if any discussions have occurred with property owners of
property that would need to be vacated in this situation.
Ms. McMonigal replied she was not aware of any discussions that had occurred.
Mr. Carpenter stated that he doesn’t understand the logic of reguiding in the
Comprehensive Plan and not addressing the access issue. He said either the current zoning
would have to change or there would be an eminent domain procedure. He said it is
confusing at this point and doesn’t seem well thought out. Mr. Carpenter said his
recommendation would be to leave the guiding as Industrial.
Ben Coulter, 3304 France Ave., spoke about the traffic impact the neighborhood will
experience with the Ellipse development and with the Minikahda Mini-storage site currently.
He commented on living it, seeing it, and feeling it every day. He said it is dangerous right
now as cars speed through. He said he has called Minikahda Mini-storage a number of
times about their tenants. A high density residential development with access on France
only will ruin the neighborhood. Mr. Coulter said a lot of people will leave the
neighborhood and property values will decrease. Mr. Coulter said he also was in favor of
more green space as an alternative.
Mary Beaudin, 4112 Randall, said that any new development at the site will be leaning over
her yard. She said she moved to the neighborhood because it is a very peaceful and special
area. She said she would recommend no change, or alternatively a park at the site extending
to the Bass Lake area. She opposes the proposed reguiding, traffic would be impossible.
Steven Craig, 3327 Huntington, stated he opposes the proposed change. He said he selected
is home in the neighborhood in 1999. He said the neighborhood is a wonderful gem of St.
Louis Park and he has no interest in seeing more high density residential space or growth in
the area. He said a good balance currently exists between the neighborhood and Minikahda
Mini-storage.
Elizabeth White, 4118 Randall, said the community pays planners to work for the
community. She commented that big decisions are currently being made and she wonders
if they are really in her interest as a member of the community. She asked if any staff or
commissioners live in the Minikahda Oaks neighborhood. She said it is a special
neighborhood with one access in and out. They chose to live there because it is a pocket
and they would like to keep it that way. They want to keep it special, quiet and safe. Ms.
White said her main concern is France Ave. and the through traffic that would exist with the
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 8
proposed change. No solution is currently being proposed for the heavy traffic on France
Ave. that would exist. Ms. White said she didn’t understand explanations given as to why
the site is attractive for housing development. She didn’t think it was the view, location, or
proximity to transit. She said it made sense to move dense housing close to the Belt Line
station area and possibly make the storage site a park. Keep the park in St. Louis Park.
She suggested that commissioners should take a walk from the storage area to the proposed
station area. She asked them to walk around the neighborhood to get a feeling for the
remarks that have been made and then make a decision which will work with the
neighborhood, not against the neighborhood. Ms. White spoke about the neighborhood
having to accept the Ellipse development. She asked that the neighborhood not be crammed
between high buildings.
Douglas White, 4118 Randall, said Minikahda Oaks is a livable, high quality neighborhood.
He said it is a model neighborhood. He spoke about the real estate pressure that may be
experienced. He said if there is only one high density residential development area proposed
in that area, put it near the train station. It will get more attention if it is the only one of its
kind. The number of homes is about 130. The Ellipse will add 130 units, doubling the
neighborhood. The potential with medium to high density residential would be 300 - 750
units. Mr. White spoke about traffic and safety issues with access on France. He spoke
about moving residential to the Belt Line station, at a collector road. He said several parcels
in that area are owned by the same people. He asked commissioners to drive down to France
Ave., Randall Ave., and to Park Glen to see what residents are talking about. It would be
devastating to the Minikahda Oaks neighborhood to be sandwiched between two very large
buildings. He suggested leaving the site as Industrial or as part of a Business Park. Mr.
White said staff had expressed concerns with having the potential for high impact industrial.
He said he didn’t think that was likely to happen and he would feel better with a Business
Park next door rather than high density residential.
Karen Beaudin, 4112 Randall, said she opposed the proposed reguiding. She suggested
moving high density closer to the station area. She spoke about traffic concerns. She said
there are 72 houses in the neighborhood, not 130. She said other development has already
occurred which has overwhelmed the neighborhood. Additional development is not needed.
Andy Fazendin, 3320 France, spoke about safety and traffic concerns. His family’s reaction
to the proposed change was that they will have to move. He said property values and
quality of life will be affected. He said he was opposed to the Ellipse and does not want
the neighborhood to be sandwiched between two high density residential developments.
Mr. Fazendin said he would be in favor of leaving the site as is or perhaps a low office
building. He would like to have a dead end on France Ave.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 9
Karen Sachs, 4024 Randall, said she agreed with remarks made by her neighbors and friends.
She moved into the neighborhood because it was quaint and secluded, with proximity to the
action. She is concerned about high density residential backing up into her back yard. It
makes her consider future investment in her home and whether or not she wants to stay in
the neighborhood. Ms. Sachs said her biggest concern is the height of the building. She
added that she is also concerned about traffic on France Ave.
Nancy Rose, 3402 Huntington, said she was probably the only person present who recalled
the discussions when the land was zoned Industrial. She said there had been a proposal for
high density apartments before that and the neighborhood opposed it. The Minikahda
Mini-storage proposal was made and residents were warned that could eventually become a
noxious use, but were told there were specific requirements for industrial zoning that could
prohibit strongly negative industrial uses from locating at that site. She spoke about the site
being a very highly desirable site for redevelopment. She said the neighborhood probably
does need some protection against some of the worst possibilities. Ms. Rose said the
residents have voiced their interest in preserving the neighborhood spirit very well, as well as
concerns about traffic. She spoke about the property being a different height level from the
neighborhood with a large drop down which is more compatible with what is across the
railroad tracks. She said acquiring roadway to take the traffic off of France Ave. should be
done to preserve the neighborhood amenities. Ms. Rose asked about alternatives. She said
no one wants high density residential. Medium density residential is also too intense for the
neighborhood. Industrial has some risks. She asked if it can become like a PUD with the
property across the tracks. Is there some way to avoid these choices now?
Chair Kramer said they would address that in their discussion.
Commissioner Robertson said these are the kinds of things the Commission is trying to work
out as part of the public hearing.
Cindy Lund, 4008 Randall, said she had lived in the neighborhood for 27 years and
remembered when the site was zoned Industrial. She said remarks made have been very
comprehensive but she wanted to ask if the high density residential would be low income,
condominiums or if there was any specific thought about that.
Jim Thompson, an employee at 3600 Alabama Ave., Alcan Packaging, said that site has been
Industrial and operating successfully since 1963. He said he appreciated the vision of a
livable community, but feels that also means industrial and jobs. Alcan Packaging currently
has 75 fulltime employees. He is concerned about proposed change from Industrial to
medium density residential. His recommendation is to make no changes at this time.
Jane Steck, 4121 Randall Ave., asked the commission to look beyond the neighborhood and
to look at the city as a whole. She said she’s been part of many discussions about the need
for strong neighborhoods, for opportunities to bring families into St. Louis Park, to keep
families here, to build a stronger community, and build stronger schools. She said everyone
needs to look beyond the neighborhood and look at the impacts. The proposed reguiding of
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 10
Minikahda Mini-storage sets a precedent for other future planning pieces in the community.
The association has been a role model for other associations. St. Louis Park puts a priority
on the strength of neighborhoods and all that can be accomplished—safety, building
community, and keeping families in St. Louis Park. Ms. Steck said we need to look at the
bigger picture beyond the impact of our neighborhood.
Chair Kramer noted he had received a note without a name asking that the Commission
consider what is happening with the motel land at the same time they consider a reguiding of
the storage site.
As there was no one else present wishing to speak, Chair Kramer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson spoke about the proposed changes, saying as wonderful as the
neighborhood is, part of the bigger picture is that LRT and an LRT station are coming.
There is going to be change. There is going to be pressure coming from developers. The
goal of the Comprehensive Plan update is to look at the big picture and try and work out
how to guide that development as it happens to protect what we have, and to protect our
neighborhoods. He went on to say that often high density residential is a good buffer
between low density residential and Business Park or offices. In this instance it’s a little
different because the access to that space creates more traffic in the neighborhood. So, it
falls out of the norm of typical zoning practices. The residents have brought it to our
attention and we want to look at it.
Commissioner Robertson said he was interested in medium density residential, and not at all
interested in high density residential at the site. Medium density building with access from
the north would serve as a good buffer. He said medium density as a massing structure
would not be bad. He said he understands the issues regarding access on France.
Commissioner Robertson asked if the city has been in contact with the Minikahda Mini-
storage property owner.
Ms. McMonigal responded staff has sent letters, however has been unable to contact the
owner by phone.
Commissioner Robertson asked about zoning the property as Business Park to tie it to the
property to the north with access from Park Glen. He asked about approximate height in
that case.
Ms. McMonigal said staff has not gotten to that point specifically. She said there could be
one or two different type Business Park districts that related to this overall land use category,
with higher density near the station area.
Commissioner Robertson said he wasn’t comfortable leaving the storage site land use as
Industrial. He said he was also very interested in feedback from the property owner.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 11
Ms. McMonigal said over the next months staff will be looking at Business Park zoning
districts and station area planning. This would be an opportunity to look more closely at the
site and get feedback from the owner.
Commissioner Robertson said he didn’t see a reason to change the Excelsior Blvd. properties.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she was against high density residential at the mini-
storage site. She explained why it wouldn’t be possible financially to reguide the site to Park
or low density residential.
Commissioner Carper stated he was in favor of making no change on the Excelsior Blvd.
properties. He said he was against medium or high density residential at the mini-storage
site. He said he would recommend keeping the site Industrial for the time being because a
better solution has not been worked out. He said the traffic issue on France Ave. would be
unacceptable. A dead end on France sounds right.
Commissioner Morris commended the neighborhood for their input. He stated he’s
inclined to side with the neighborhood. He said if they want to keep it Industrial that is
fine, but inevitably it will change. It’s a good development site. He opposed high density
residential and favored medium density residential at the site. He said he was willing to
recommend it remain Industrial if that was the consensus. He said he supported the
Excelsior Blvd. property owners’ positions. He commented that change was inevitable,
however, and there may be a wake up call when a developer makes a proposal.
Commissioner Ford, youth member, stated he thought the most ideal suggestion he heard
for the mini-storage site would be reguiding to Park, even if it would be the most difficult to
accomplish. It would be the best way to prevent a large multi-story building from being
built there and it would preserve the quiet pocket feeling of the neighborhood, as well as
providing access to trails.
Chair Kramer said he also favored no change on the Excelsior Blvd. sites. He said he is not
in favor of increasing traffic on France Ave. He said he did not like what he’s hearing about
traffic and thinks more study needs to occur regarding traffic in that area.
Ms. McMonigal stated that a traffic study was done for the Ellipse development. The island
at France will be an improvement.
Chair Kramer spoke about station area planning and unknown details at this time. He said
he was in favor of not changing the Industrial guiding at this time.
Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend adoption of the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan with three exceptions: no change to the Industrial guiding at 3200 France Ave., the
Japs Olson site, ApplianceSmart and the Weis Builders site. Commissioner Carper seconded
the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4g) Page 12
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked staff to comment on steps going forward for the
Minikahda Oaks neighborhood to stay involved with regarding 3200 France Ave.
Ms. McMonigal said Phase II of station area plans will begin in the spring or summer which
will be an opportunity to look at the properties in more detail. Staff will work with the
neighbors for their input at that point. She added that the Comprehensive Plan Update is
scheduled to go to City Council on December 21st.
Commissioner Morris noted that another part of the Comprehensive Plan which
neighborhoods can work with is the Plan by Neighborhood, which is almost like an
amendment.
Ms. McMonigal said that is one of the next steps. The input process occurred last spring.
Those plans are being written and will be brought back to neighborhoods for additional
input and feedback in the spring and summer. She said both the proposed and existing
Comprehensive Plan are available on the city’s website.
5. Communications
The December 16th meeting has been cancelled.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4h
OFFICIAL MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2009
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals met on Tuesday, September 29, 2009, at St.
Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. The
regularly scheduled meeting of September 24th was moved to September 29th due to lack
of quorum.
Members Present: Chair Susan Bloyer
Vice Chair James Gainsley
Commissioner Ryan Burt
Commissioner Henry Solmer
Members Absent: Commissioner Paul Roberts
Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Nancy Sells, Administrative Secretary
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
Chair Bloyer called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes: July 30, 2009
Commissioner Burt made a motion to approve the minutes of July 30, 2009.
Motion carried. Voting yes: Bloyer, Burt, Gainsley, Solmer.
3. Consent Agenda: None
4. Public Hearings
A. Case No. 09-20-VAR – The request of Chris and Carrie Long for a variance
from the side yard setback requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (Section
36-164(f)(5) to allow a 2.9 foot setback instead of the required 5.0 foot
setback for a proposed attached garage with second floor living space for
property at 3751 Huntington Avenue South
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He concluded
his presentation by saying that staff finds the proposed addition is reasonable in size for
the lot, does not block sunlight and air to the adjoining properties, the addition is in
keeping with the character of the neighborhood, and that the proposed addition avoids
financial difficulty by allowing a second story addition without significantly having to
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
modify the first floor. Staff therefore recommends approval with conditions that the
variance applies to the attached garage and second floor living space as shown on
exhibits only.
Chair Bloyer asked if an analysis had been done for a rear yard detached garage. She
mentioned the large shed in the backyard.
Mr. Morrison responded there is room for a detached garage in the backyard. This would
reduce the area of the backyard, making it a size which is not uncommon in St. Louis
Park, but mostly what it does is affect what the applicants can do as far as a living space
expansion upstairs. The variance request makes it possible to add a second floor living
space.
Commissioner Gainsley asked if a detached garage could be constructed without a
variance.
Mr. Morrison responded that the applicants would be able to construct a detached garage
without a variance.
Chair Bloyer opened the public hearing.
Chris Long, applicant, said if the variance was approved they intend to remove the shed.
He stated that the seven surrounding and adjacent neighbors have signed a document for
the record saying they have reviewed the plans and have no objections. He went on to
describe the fenced backyard saying they would prefer not to give up the backyard space
as it is used frequently by their young children and the neighbor children. The fence
includes a swinging gate for the neighbor children to access the backyard.
Commissioner Gainsley asked the applicants if they had ever used a tandem garage. He
spoke about the difficulty of backing out of a 12-foot wide, 30-foot length space as
opposed to a detached garage with storage space.
Mr. Long responded he had never owned a tandem garage but said he felt comfortable
using one. He spoke about the lot size and a substantial driveway going to the back
yard, and that a two car detached garage would result in more blockage to the neighbors
in the back. Those neighbors have indicated they are delighted that the shed will be
removed.
Carrie Long, applicant, stated that she also was comfortable using a tandem garage.
Brian Collins, the applicant’s builder, spoke about how carefully the applicants sited the
new kitchen window for a good view of the kids playing in the back. He spoke about
how the applicants want to maintain some kind of green space for the kids rather than
giving it up for a detached garage. He said preserving the green space was a big concern
of theirs.
Commissioner Gainsley asked the applicants if it was just the overwhelming idea of
having to change the house configuration that discouraged them from building a detached
garage or if they actually prefer having an attached garage.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4h) Page 3
Ms. Long said they just remodeled their kitchen three years ago. She said it would be a
huge expense and a waste of materials to change it. She said they love the kitchen and
the den has been improved with a better heat source. The whole main floor is the way
they want it. She spoke about being able to preserve the backyard green space.
Mr. Long added that they didn’t want to turn the backyard into a substantial driveway
with lots of pavement and a detached garage.
Chair Bloyer closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Gainsley said on balance, considering the possibilities of hardship in
doing this and the loss of backyard space, a detached garage would eat up a lot of square
footage. He said staff has not indicated that a detached garage would have reduced the
back yard to an unacceptable square footage amount, so obviously that is not the case.
He said it won’t be far from that amount, however, as a detached garage, turnaround pad
and driveway would reduce the area to a stubble. Commissioner Gainsley went on to say
that a two car garage is a reasonable property right and not having a two car garage is
certainly a portion of a hardship. The property is 15.3 ft. from next door and that is more
than the 10 ft. required separation between buildings. He said he assumed light affecting
other properties from the second story portion was not a factor. He said generally he is
in favor of the variance and would make a motion to accept it, although there is an
alternative that doesn’t require a variance and the board needs to examine that.
Commissioner Solmer said putting the two car garage, plus driveway and turnaround in
the back would take up half of the backyard and it would still be a tight squeeze past the
north side of the house. He said overall it would be a better use of the space to permit the
variance to put on a tandem garage.
Commissioner Burt said he agreed with the remarks made by Commissioners Gainsley
and Solmer.
Commissioner Solmer asked if there would be any windows on the north side of the
garage.
Mr. Long responded that there will be two windows on the north side of the garage.
Chair Bloyer said she agreed with comments made by Commissioners and said she
favored granting the variance.
Commissioner Gainsley made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 02-09 granting a 2.1 foot
variance to the side yard for a proposed attached garage and living space addition.
Motion carried. Voting yes: Bloyer, Burt, Gainsley, Solmer
5. Unfinished Business: None
6. New Business: None
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4h) Page 4
7. Communications
Mr. Morrison said a meeting would not be held in October.
8. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned by Chair Bloyer at 6:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4i
MINUTES
St. Louis Park Housing Authority
St. Louis Park City Hall – Westwood Room
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
5:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Catherine Courtney, Steve Fillbrandt, Justin
Kaufman
STAFF PRESENT: Jane Klesk, Kathy Larsen, Kevin Locke, Teresa Schlegel,
Michele Schnitker
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 5:04 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes for January, 2010
The Board minutes of January 13, 2010 were unanimously approved.
3. Hearings – None
4. Reports and Committees – None
5. Unfinished Business – None
6. New Business
a. Review of Proposed 2010 CDBG Allocation
Ms. Larsen updated the Commissioners on the proposed allocation of the 2010
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, in the amount of $206,455,
stating that there will be a stronger emphasis on assisting low income single-family
homeowners this year. Additional proposed allocations are for the Emergency Repair
Program, HA renovation of a scattered site home, and Parks and Rec programming
at Meadowbrook Manor and Ainsworth Park. The proposed allocations are
consistent with the City Council’s adopted Strategic Direction related to housing in
St. Louis Park.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
2
b. Review of Draft Procurement Policy
Ms. Schnitker presented the Draft Housing Authority Procurement Policy,
explaining that staff does not recommend changes to the previously approved dollar
thresholds governing the procedures required for purchases and contracts under the
small purchase and formal bidding process. The formal bid threshold of $50,000 is
consistent with the amount specified in State statute governing housing authorities.
After Board discussion, Commissioner Kaufman inquired if there was any limitation
or duration of contracts, and suggested resolicitation after several consecutive years of
a contract. After receiving Board input, staff will revise the policy and present a final
draft for approval at the March Board meeting. The draft policy will also be
submitted to the local HUD office for review and comment prior to final Board
approval.
7. Communications from Executive Director
a. Claims List for February, 2010
b. Communications
1. HUD FSS and Shelter Plus Care Award letters
Ms. Schnitker announced that the HA has been awarded $17,510 for
the Family Self-Sufficiency Coordinator’s Program (FSS), and $178,944 in
Shelter Plus Care funding.
2. Monthly Report for February, 2010
3. Scattered Site Houses and Hamilton House (verbal report)
4. Draft Financial Statements
8. Other
9. Adjournment
Commissioner Fillbrandt moved to adjourn the meeting, and Commissioner Kaufman
seconded
the motion. The motion passed 3-0. The meeting adjourned at 5:58 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________
Renee Fitzgerald, Secretary
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
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 fill vacancies on the Police Advisory Commission with
terms as follows:
Name Commission Term
Expiration
Gregg Lindberg Police Advisory Commission 12/31/2010
Matthew Flory Police Advisory Commission 12/31/2010
Rashmi Seneviratne Police Advisory Commission 12/31/2011
Kimberly Mayes Police Advisory Commission 12/31/2012
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to appoint the individuals to the Police Advisory Commission and for the
terms listed above?
BACKGROUND:
The City Council reviewed the applications of and interviewed the above individuals on February 16
and February 22. Council discussed the candidates and unanimously agreed to make appointments
to the boards and commissions identified and for the terms listed.
Commission Vacancies Update
The City Clerk’s office continually recruits for interested individuals for our Boards &
Commissions. Current openings are listed below.
Charter Commission -- There is currently one adult opening on the Charter Commission. Jim
Brimeyer and Matthew Flory were recently appointed by the Hennepin County Chief Judge for
terms through 2012.
Telecommunications Advisory Commission – There is currently one adult opening on the
Telecommunications Advisory Commission for which an application has been received and reviewed
by Council with an interview tentatively set for March 22.
Community Education Advisory Commission -- We are assisting the school district in their
recruitment for commissioners on the Community Education Advisory Commission.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item 5a) Page 2
Youth Commissioner Openings -- Openings for youth commissioners are sought for our Human
Rights Commission (one opening), Police Advisory Commission (one opening) and
Telecommunications Advisory Commission (one opening).
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Appointing 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: Lisa Songle, Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
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 – Ringo.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve application from Ringo Restaurants, Inc. dba
Ringo for an on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor license to be located at 5331 16th Street with the
license term through March 1, 2011.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to approve the liquor license for Ringo Restaurants, Inc.?
BACKGROUND:
The City received an application from Ringo Restaurants, Inc. doing business as Ringo for an on-
sale intoxicating liquor and Sunday sales license. The establishment plans to open during the month
of April. It will be located at 5331 16th Street in the Shops at West End. The premise to be licensed
is approximately 7,760 square feet consisting of 234 seats inside and 58 outdoor patio seating.
Ringo will be an upscale casual restaurant with a globally roving menu.
Ringo Restaurants, Inc. owns one other location in Minneapolis called the Forum. James Ringo is
the President and CEO. The General Manager will be Ryan Aberle.
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 prior to the public hearing. The required
public hearing legal notice was published in the Sun Sailor Newspaper on March 4, 2010.
Should Council approve the liquor license no actual license will be issued until all required
compliance is met with the 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 $8,000 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: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 6b
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 to Revise Compost Ordinance.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Approve 1st Reading of Ordinance adopting revisions to
composting ordinance and set Second Reading for April 5, 2010.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council agree with the proposed revisions to the City’s composting ordinance?
BACKGROUND:
History
On February 22, 2010, staff provided a written Study Session report informing Council of proposed
change to the City’s composting ordinance.
Residential composting is currently addressed in Section 22-121, Chapter 22 (Solid Waste
Management of the City Code. The current compost ordinance allows for composting of yard waste
items (e.g. grass, leaves, straw, twigs, and dead plants).
When drafting the proposed revisions, Public Works staff solicited input from other departments
that could possibly be affected by the changes. The changes were also discussed by the E-Group and
DRC (these are interdepartmental staff teams that meet to discuss environmental and
development/code related matters).
Staff did not solicit public input for the following reasons:
• Residential composting is currently allowed and the proposed revisions are only intended
to update the ordinance based on current industry best management practices.
• The proposed changes make composting less restrictive than currently allowed.
• Staff believes that the changes are non-controversial
It is possible there could be some concern these changes could lead to odor problems. This should
not be the case, as long as ordinance requirements are followed.
A notice was published in the Sun Sailor on March 4, 2010 informing interested persons of the city’s
intent to consider ordinance revisions. If approved as proposed herein, the revisions will become
effective April 30, 2010.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6b) Page 2
Proposed Changes
The purpose of the revision is to accomplish the following: to modify the language to include more
definitions, to update the language based on current best practices, to better define conditions of
composting, and to add items that can be composted. Conditions of composting include: what
materials are allowed and which are not, acceptable type and location of compost structure, and
proper maintenance of the actual compost material.
The proposed change allows for adding kitchen scraps (e.g. raw fruits and vegetable scraps, coffee
grounds, tea bags, etc.) to the compost along with the yard waste materials. This change provides for
a more nutrient-rich compost material. Over the past several years staff has had numerous resident
requests to allow kitchen scraps to be added to the compost, as is allowed in other communities
throughout the metro area.
It should be noted that there are some kitchen items that will continue to not be allowed in the
compost mix. Examples of these items include: meat, bones, grease, eggs, and dairy products, as they
tend to attract vermin.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The activities above support or complement the following Strategic Direction adopted by the City
Council:
• Educating staff/public on environmental consciousness, stewardship, and best practices.
• Working in areas such as … environmental innovations.
Attachments: Ordinance
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator
Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6b) Page 3
ORDINANCE NO. ______-10
ORDINANCE ADOPTING COMPOSTING REVISIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK ORDAINS:
Section 1. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Chapter 22 is hereby amended as follows:
Article III. Residential Composting
Sec. 22-121. Compost.
This article shall be known and may be cited as the Compost Ordinance of the city.
(Ord. No. 2249, § 1, 9-2-2003Sec. 22-122121. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed
to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning.
Back Yard means the area between the rear lot and the rear face of the residential property.
Browns are carbon-rich materials such as dried grasses or leaves, straw, twigs, or dead plants.
Compost is partially decomposed organic matter. It is dark, easily crumbles, and has an earthy aroma.
It is created by biological processes in which soil-inhabiting organisms break down plant tissue. When
decomposition is complete, compost has turned to a dark brown, powdery material called humus.
Compost Structure is an enclosed container made of durable material such as wood, plastic or
fiberglass, enclosed on the top and sides.
Yard waste means organic material consisting of grass clippings, leaves, and other forms of organic
garden waste.
Composting is the process of creating compost. It is a method of speeding natural decomposition
under controlled conditions. means any aboveground microbial process that converts plant material to
organic soil amendment or mulch.
Greens are nitrogen-rich materials like green leaves, coffee grounds, tea bags, plant trimmings, and
raw fruit and vegetable scraps.
Inorganic Material is derived from non-living material.
Organic Material is derived from or produced through the biological activity of living things.
Residential Property means a residential dwelling with four or fewer dwelling units.
Yard waste means garden wastes, leaves, lawn cuttings, weeds, shrub and tree waste, and prunings.
Kitchen waste means egg shells, coffee grounds, chopped vegetables, and fruit
remains.Acceptable materials means plant material or garden waste consisting of grass clippings,
leaves, weeds, small twigs (1/4 inch diameter or less), evergreen cones and needles, wood chips,
organic mulch, herbaceous garden debris and commercial ingredients (mixed into the
composting material) specifically designed to speed or enhance decomposition.(Ord. No. 2249, §
1, 9-2-2003)
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6b) Page 4
Sec. 22-122. Permits.
No Permit is required to compost or to install a compost structure on the residential property.
Sec. 22-123. Duties of Owner, Occupant or Tenant.
Every owner, occupant or tenant of any premises who composts shall do so does not otherwise
dispose of or compost Yard Waste in a sanitary and environmentally sound manner, shall use a compost
structure that meets the design standards described in this section, and shall meet all other standards set
forth in this ordinance. Composting shall be allowed only on residential property. the City-contracted
yard waste service, if eligible, or contract with a licensed collector to collect and dispose of Yard Waste.
Every owner, occupant or tenant shall make such Yard Waste available to collector as required under this
Chapter.
(Ord. No. 2249, § 1, 9-2-2003)
Sec. 22-124. Duties of Licensed Collectors.
Each licensed collector shall collect yard waste separately from other material, and haul it away to an
approved compost site.
(Ord. No. 2249, § 1, 9-2-2003)
Sec. 22-125124. Conditions of Composting Process
Every owner, occupant or tenant of any premises who composts Yard Waste shall do so in an
environmentally sound manner, shall use a compost bin or structure that meets the design standards
described in this section, and shall meet all other standards set forth in this ordinance. Composting shall
be allowed only on properties where there is located a single family detached dwelling, up to a four-plex
multi-family dwelling.No permit is required to compost or to install a compost structure on the property.
Composting is allowed on residential properties provided the following conditions are met:
(a)Containment Structure Location.
Composting containment structures shall be located in the back yard of the residential property and
not be located in a front yard. Composting containment structures shall be located at least 15 feet from
any inhabited building not owned by the generator of the compost material, 3 feet from any City park,
trail, alley or right-of-way. The compost enclosure must be located above the 100-year high water level
for the closest adjacent pond or wetland.
(b)Materials Allowed in Compost Containment Structure.
Only acceptable materials, as defined in Sec. 22-97 Definitions, generated from the legal boundaries
of the site of the containment structure shall be allowed into the containment structure. Composting of the
following materials shall be prohibited: kitchen waste, food scraps, meat, animal waste, carcasses, or
other vermin-attracting materials.
(c) Containment Structure Maintenance.
Standard composting techniques shall be employed to enhance rapid biological degradation
of the material without producing objectionable odors. Techniques include, but are not limited to,
aeration, adding moisture, and providing a balance of composting materials. Compost shall be
properly maintained to minimize odor generation and to promote effective decomposition of the
materials. Containment structures must be properly maintained at all times, and in such a
manner that conforms to the requirements of this ordinance.
(d) Containment Structure Design.
Compost containers must comply with this ordinance. Upon the start of the composting process, the
container must be in place. Compost containers shall be designed to limit odors as well as rodent and pest
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6b) Page 5
access. Compost structures shall be made of impenetrable and durable material such as wood, plastic or
fiberglass, enclosed on the top and sides, and not to exceed a total of 150 cubic feet in volume for all
composting on site. Wire structures, metal fencing or other open mesh materials shall not be used for
composting.
(a) Allowable Materials
Only the following materials may be placed in a compost structure: leaves, grass clippings, straw,
non-woody and woody plant trimmings, untreated/unpainted sawdust, raw fruit and vegetables scraps, dry
eggshells, tea bags, coffee grounds, or additional materials approved by the City.
(b) Unacceptable Materials
Under no circumstances shall any of the following items be placed in a compost structure: meat,
bones, grease, eggs, dairy products, whole or partial animals, feces, or inorganic materials such as rock,
plastics, or synthetic fibers.
(c) Compost Structure
Compost shall be contained in a structure. Compost structures shall be designed to limit odors as
well as rodent and pest access. Compost structures shall be made of impenetrable, and durable material
such as wood, plastic or fiberglass, enclosed on the top and sides, and not to exceed a total of 150 cubic
feet in volume that provide adequate aeration. Wire structures, metal fencing or other open mesh
materials shall not be used for composting.
(d) Location on Property
Compost structures shall be located in the back yard. Compost structures shall be located at least
15 feet from any inhabited building or edge of a surface water body, 3 feet from any City park, trail, alley
or right-of-way.
(e) Maintenance
Compost shall be properly maintained at all times to minimize odors and to promote effective
decomposition of the materials in a safe, secure and sanitary manner. Properly maintaining the compost
pile includes regularly turning the pile to increase air circulation, maintaining appropriate moisture levels
and keeping the ratio of ingredients to approximately two parts green to one part brown.
A properly maintained compost pile consists of three things:
1. Air circulation - keep the air circulating by regularly turning the pile with a shovel or pitch fork.
2. Moisture - maintain appropriate moisture levels. To test the pile, pick up a handful of the mixture
- if water drips out, there is too much water, if the material falls to pieces, it's too dry. Ideal
conditions exist when the mixture stays in a clump for a few seconds before breaking apart.
3. The Right Ingredients - keep the ratio of ingredients consistent: two parts green to one part
brown.
(Ord. No. 2249, § 1, 9-2-2003)
Sec. 22-126 125. Nuisance.
Composting that results in objectionable odors, and/or includes prohibited material, and/or attracts vermin
is deemed a public health nuisance. Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall
also constitute a nuisance, and the owner and/or occupant of the lot on which nuisance is located shall be
responsible for its abatement. All compost structures or materials not in compliance with this section
shall be declared a public nuisance and are subject to abatement and assessment as provided in Chapter 12
of this Code.
(Ord. No. 2249, § 1, 9-2-2003)
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6b) Page 6
Sec. 22-127 Existing Non-Conforming.
All existing non-conforming compost piles must be in conformance by May 1, 2004.
(Ord. No. 2249, § 1, 9-2-2003)
Sec. 22-128126. Application to City Owned or Operated Compost Facilities.
This Article does not apply to any compost facility or community garden owned or operated by the City.
(Ord. No. 2249, § 1, 9-2-2003)
Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect days after its publication.
First Reading March 15, 200
Second Reading April 5, 2010
Date of Publication April 15, 2010
Date Ordinance takes effect April 30, 2010
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council __________, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 6c
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:
Marriott Hotel –Vacation, Termination of a Special Permit, Final PUD and Plat.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Mayor to close public hearing.
Motion to approve First Reading of Ordinance approving the Vacation of a drainage and utility
easement at 600 Highway 169, and setting the Second Reading of the proposed Ordinance for April
5, 2010.
Motion to Adopt Resolution Rescinding the Special Permit for property located at 400 Highway
169 South, 435 Ford Road, and 600 Highway 169 South.
Motion to Adopt Resolution giving approval for the Final Plat of METROPOINT.
Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) under Section
36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to Zoning for Property Zoned O-Office
located at 435 Ford Road, 400 Highway 169, and 600 Highway 169.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to take action to allow for the development of the Marriott Hotel in
Shelard Park, including a Vacation, Termination of the Special Permit, Final Plat, and Final Planned
Unit Development based on the merits of the proposal and its relationship to the City’s code and
Comprehensive Plan?
BACKGROUND:
Requested is approval of a Final Plat, Final Planned Unit Development (PUD), and Vacation of a
Drainage and Utility Easement for a new Marriott hotel in the Shelard Park area. In addition to
these requests, the applicant has requested the termination of the existing Special Permit; the PUD
will take its place.
The plat and PUD would accommodate the construction of a new 162-room, 7-story hotel within
the Metropoint office complex, located in the northwest corner of Highways 169 and 394. The
hotel will include a first floor lobby with a restaurant that will primarily serve hotel guests, and
several conference rooms to accommodate business meetings and other small events. Also included
in the 15-acre PUD are three existing office buildings that include approximately 700,000 square
feet of office space, as well as the parking structures associated with the office buildings. The tallest
office building, the 600 Tower, is 18 stories in height. There are no changes to the office buildings
or the parking structures included as part of the PUD.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 2
The hotel proposed by CSM, a “Courtyard by Marriott,” would be located on a portion of the
Metropoint Office Park. At the present time, the office park includes four office buildings and
several parking structures; there are services (including food and retail options) currently available
on-site, although all such services are located within one of the office buildings. In addition to
providing a location for the CSM hotel, the proposed PUD and Plat includes another lot where
additional service or retail-oriented development could occur in the future. This lot, located
immediately north of the 600 Tower, was the former location of a movie theater. The theater was
razed in 2007.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Final PUD and Plat on February
24th, 2010. There was no one present to speak at the public hearing, and the Planning Commission
recommended approval of the request.
The Preliminary PUD and Plat were approved by the City Council on November 2nd, 2009.
Site Design:
The site is located immediately northwest of the intersection of I-394 and Highway 169. The
proposed design for the hotel reflects the overall design of the surrounding buildings, with stucco,
glass, and a minimal amount of brick. A ground-level restaurant will have an open floor plan and an
outside dining option during the summer months. A large outdoor area is proposed to the east of
the hotel, surrounding the stormwater pond. There, hotel guests and office employees will have
access to a walking path, seating, and other passive recreational amenities.
Access to the site is provided on Ford Road; cars are able to enter the hotel via a drop-off circle
shared with the 600 tower, and enter the parking structure located immediately adjacent. For transit
users, Metro Transit route 675 passes by the site at approximately 30 minute intervals, with less
frequent service during the evening hours.
Special Permit:
In 1992, the City Council approved major
revisions to the Zoning Ordinance. One
change resulted in the elimination of Special
Permits in favor of uses that are either
Permitted, Permitted with Conditions,
permitted by Conditional Use Permit, or by
Planned Unit Development. Where
appropriate, the ordinance encourages the
termination of Special Permits in favor of the
revised categories.
The Shelard Park neighborhood is currently
incorporated into a single Special Permit. The
applicant has requested that the Special Permit
for the site be terminated, and that the new Planned Unit Development take its place. Although the
City Council action would directly impact the Metropoint site, the Special Permit would remain in
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 3
effect for all other included properties. The lines on the graphic at right depict the properties
included in the original Special Permit; the Metropoint site is shown in brown.
Zoning Review:
Final PUD
The Zoning Ordinance requires that the Planning Commission review applications for Final PUD
and determine whether the materials submitted are in substantial compliance with the Preliminary
PUD and the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has reviewed the application and has determined that the
proposed hotel remains in compliance with the Preliminary PUD and is in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
Zoning Analysis
The existing office park can be converted to a Planned Unit Development from a Special Permit.
The requirements of the Zoning Ordinance will be met through this transition. The primary
modifications to the Zoning Ordinance, related to both the hotel and the overall office park, are
related to building setbacks.
The Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is “Office,” and the site is correspondingly zoned
“O – Office.” Hotels are permitted with conditions in the Office Zoning District. A PUD is
requested to meet dimensional standards and to allow for modifications to the DORA requirements.
The table below reflects a zoning analysis of the hotel portion of the Final PUD only:
Factor Required Proposed Met?
Height No maximum height 7 stories; 88 feet Yes
Building Materials Minimum 60%
Class I materials 70% stucco, glass, brick Yes
Setbacks – Front / Rear
Setbacks – Side / Side
None required –
PUD See below Yes
Off-Street Parking 2,495 spaces 2,898 spaces
51 surface spaces – hotel Yes
Bicycle Parking 250 spaces 16 Yes
Floor Area Ratio No maximum FAR 1.66 Yes
Open Area / DORA 49,539 SF (6%) 67,221 SF (8.1%) Yes
Landscaping Hotel – 93 trees, 558
shrubs
Alternatives requested –
discussion below
Yes
Mechanical Equipment Full screening Provided – rooftop &
internal
Yes
Refuse Handling Full screening
required
Internal trash rooms
provided
Yes
Stormwater Required city and
watershed standards Above ground pond Yes
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 4
Architectural Materials
The proposed hotel would feature similar architecture in comparison to the existing Office Park.
The hotel would consist primarily of stucco and glass, to match the adjacent office buildings. In
addition to these materials, brick is used to enhance the level of finish at the pedestrian level. The
proposed hotel will have 70% of Class I materials, exceeding the architectural materials standards of
the Zoning Ordinance. Class I materials on the proposed hotel are as follows:
• Stucco: 43%
• Glass: 21%
• Terra Cotta Masonry: 4%
• Brick: 2%
Other materials used on the building include high quality metal panels, decorative metal, and a
polished precast base.
Parking
The parking requirement for the office buildings and the hotel results in a need for a total of 2,495
off-street parking spaces on the site. There are 2,898 parking spaces currently available on the site.
Although no additional parking is required to construct the hotel, CSM is proposing 51 off-street
spaces in a surface parking lot adjacent to the hotel.
The bicycle parking requirement for the site is 250 spaces. Because the area is somewhat isolated
and challenging to reach by bicycle, the applicant believes this level of bicycle parking would not be
appropriate at this time. Proof of bicycle parking will be provided as an alternative; several portions
of the parking ramp adjacent to the 400 Building would be converted to bicycle parking if it
becomes necessary. The hotel will provide 16 bicycle parking spaces. It is expected that some hotel
staff may use the bicycle parking; at this time, it is not expected that hotel guests will arrive by bike.
DORA
There is 67,221 square feet, or 8% of the total finished square footage of the site, provided for
outside access and recreation to meet the requirements for Designed Outdoor Recreation Area
(DORA) within the PUD. Because of the park dedication provided when the site was originally
developed, the DORA requirement is reduced from 12% to 6% through the use of a PUD. Shelard
Park is an 8.5 acre city-owned park accessible directly from the office park that was dedicated as part
of the original development,
The DORA is provided through a mix of outdoor seating along the sidewalk/trail area, as well as
through several outdoor patios located near the office buildings within the development. The hotel
development will include a large outdoor plaza area to the east of the building, surrounding the
stormwater pond. Although the stormwater pond does not count towards the DORA calculation, it
provides an amenity to office employees and hotel guests using the outdoor plaza area.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 5
Landscaping
The landscape plan meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for a high density site. The
plan includes the installation of 53 new trees and 247 new shrubs, all incorporated into the
accessible DORA areas. In addition to the required trees and shrubs, the landscape plan includes
over 1,000 new perennials located around the site. The applicant is requesting the use of alternative
landscape options as approved in the Preliminary PUD and permitted by the Zoning Ordinance to
fulfill the remainder of the landscaping requirement.
Alternatives included in the plan include integrated pedestrian facilities, use of native grasses and
other perennials throughout the site plan, a stormwater pond designed to serve as a site amenity, and
an improved pedestrian access across the site representing a mixed-traffic approach that will increase
the level of activity on the site. Other landscape improvements were completed on the remainder of
the site in early 2008 as part of an upgrade completed by BPG Properties. These improvements also
reflect the intent of the alternative provisions allowed for landscaping under the Zoning Ordinance,
and supplement the other alternatives included as part of the hotel proposal.
Tree Replacement
Tree replacement for the hotel site takes into account all existing significant trees on the PUD site.
This totals 321 caliper inches. The tree replacement formula requires additional tree plantings only
when over 20% of a site’s total trees are removed. In this case, less than 20% of the site’s trees will
be removed. Nevertheless, the applicant is proposing the installation of 53 new trees, which
accounts for 136 caliper inches of new trees on the site.
Stormwater Management
The proposed stormwater pond will provide water storage and quality improvement measures for the
hotel site. The pond will have an urban character to improve the outdoor environment for guests
and office workers using the surrounding DORA areas. Public Works Staff reviewed the stormwater
calculations and construction details and determined that the pond meets the requirements of the
City. The site is located in the Bassett Creek Watershed; the Bassett Creek Watershed Management
Organization has also reviewed the proposal and determined that the pond will meet its
requirements.
Engineering Comments
The City Engineer reviewed the proposed plans and determined that the site has adequate access to
public and private utilities and roadways. It was noted that permits for erosion control and right-of-
way access will be required prior to construction. Additionally, permits from the Bassett Creek
Watershed District will also be required.
Final Plat:
The applicant has proposed a subdivision from two lots to four lots. The two existing lots each
currently have an office building and a parking ramp. Through the platting process, each lot
remains conforming. The lots are as follows:
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 6
Lot 1
Lot 1 is 28,814 square feet located adjacent to Ford Road. This lot is the location of the former
movie theater; there is no development currently proposed for this location. However, the property
owner is proposing a lot in this location to improve the possibilities for future development. It is
anticipated that the lot could be used for a small retail or office use. A PUD amendment would be
required for any future development on this lot.
Lot 2
Lot 2 is 189,709 square feet and includes the existing 18-story 600 Tower building and associated
ramp. Much of the parking turnaround from Ford Road is also on this lot; private easements will be
conveyed across the parking area to permit access by the hotel and users of the ramp at the 400
Building.
Lot 3
Lot 3 is 71,417 square feet and has frontage along the Highway 169 frontage road. This lot would
be used for the Marriott hotel development, discussed above as part of the Preliminary PUD.
Lot 4
Lot 4 is 205,979 square feet and includes the existing 8-story 400 Building and associated ramp.
This building was included in the plat because of the need to adjust the lot line between the 400
Building and the proposed hotel.
Subdivision Variances
Two variances were approved as part of the Preliminary Plat; the Final Plat meets the requirements
set forth at that time. The variances, for sidewalk construction and easement dedication, were
approved based on unique circumstances applying to the property related to site access and the
configuration of existing buildings.
Park and Trail Dedication
As noted at the time of Preliminary Plat, the City-owned Shelard Park itself was dedicated in the
1970s as part of the original platting of the area. For this reason, no additional Park and Trail
Dedication is required as part of this proposal.
Vacation of Easement:
The applicants have included a request for the vacation of a 15-foot drainage and utility easement.
The easement, created at the time Shelard Park was originally platted, runs directly under the
parking ramp attached to the 600 Tower, and has never been used for drainage or utilities. The City
Engineer has determined that the vacation is acceptable and appropriate. A graphic depicting the
proposed vacation is attached for review.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 7
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The construction of a new stormwater pond on the CSM hotel site improves the level of stewardship
for the water resources of Shelard Park, meeting the environmental goals of the Vision.
Attachments: Ordinance - Vacation
Resolution – Termination of a Special Permit
Resolution – Final Plat
Resolution – Final Planned Unit Development
Project Narrative provided by Applicant
Location Map
Site Plan and related documents
Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Planner
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 8
ORDINANCE NO._____-10
ORDINANCE VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT
600 Highway 169
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. A petition in writing signed by a majority of all of the owners of all property
abutting upon both sides of the easement proposed to be vacated has been duly filed. The notice of said
petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on March 4, 2010 and the City Council has
conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the easement is not needed for public
purposes, and that it is for the best interest of the public that said easement be vacated.
Section 2. The following described drainage and utility easement as now dedicated and laid out
within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated:
That part of the 15 foot wide utility and drainage easement adjoining the common line to Lot 1 and Lot 2,
Block 7, as dedicated in the plat of SHELARD PARK, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which lies northerly of
a line 15 feet north as measured perpendicular to and parallel with the south line of said Lots 1 and 2 and
lying southerly of a line 10 feet south as measured perpendicular to and parallel with the northerly line of said
Lots 1 and 2.
reserving, however, to the City of St. Louis Park any and all easements that may exist in, over, and across the
described property for storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, and public utility purposes.
Section 3. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this ordinance in the Office
of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Sec.4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Public Hearing March 15, 2010
First Reading March 15, 2010
Second Reading
Date of Publication
Date Ordinance takes effect
Adopted by the City Council
Reviewed for Administration
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 9
RESOLUTION NO. 10-___
RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 90-58 ADOPTED ON MAY 21, 1990 FOR
CERTAIN PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 400 HIGHWAY 169 SOUTH, 435 FORD ROAD, AND
600 HIGHWAY 169 SOUTH.
FINDINGS
WHEREAS, Kelly C. Gibbel, Vice President for BPG Properties, LTD., as Agent for Interchange
Investors, LLC, owner of the property affected by the special permit, has requested that the City Council
terminate the special permit for properties having the following legal description:
Parcel 1:
Lot 2, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, AND that part of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, lying
Easterly of a line drawn from a point on the North line of said lot distant 64.51 feet Westerly of the
Northeast corner of said Lot to a point on the South line of said Lot distant 68.97 feet Westerly of
the Southeast corner of said Lot, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document
No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Parcel 2:
Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, except that part of Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK shown as
Parcel 45 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 27-23 recorded
as Document No. 5062849, also described as that part of said Lot 3 lying easterly of a straight line
from Corner B9 to Corner B25 on said Plat 27-23, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK
recorded as Document No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
Parcel 10:
Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, except that part thereof lying Easterly of a line drawn from a
point on the North line of said lot distant 64.51 feet Westerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot to a
point on the South line of said Lot distant 68.97 feet Westerly of the Southeast corner of said Lot,
according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document No. 3798450 in the office of the
County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Parcel 11:
That part of the East 10 rods of the West Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 117,
Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian lying Southerly of that part of Lot 1, Block 7,
SHELARD PARK, Hennepin county, Minnesota, which lies within said West Half and lying
Northerly of a line drawn Easterly from and perpendicular to the West line of said East 10 rods, from
a point on said West line distant 36 feet Southerly, as measured along said West line, from the most
Westerly corner of said Lot 1, to the East line of said West Half and there terminating; according to
the Government Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 10
WHEREAS a special permit was issued for the subject property pursuant to Resolution No. 90-58 of
the St. Louis Park City Council dated May 21, 1990; and
WHEREAS, due to changed zoning regulations, a Planned Unit Development within the O-Office
Zoning District has been requested for the properties, and
WHEREAS, once the special permit is terminated, the above described property will be governed by
the regulations of the O-Office Zoning District and the Resolution approving the Planned Unit
Development; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this resolution to terminate the special permit granted by Resolution
No. 90-58 for the subject properties only; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this resolution that the special permit remain effective for all other
properties included within its boundaries.
CONCLUSION
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution No. 90-58 is hereby rescinded for the
subject properties and replaced by this resolution which terminates the special permit.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council , 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 11
RESOLUTION NO. 10-___
RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR FINAL PLAT OF
METROPOINT
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Interchange Investors, LLC, owner and subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as
METROPOINT has submitted an application for approval of final plat of said subdivision in the manner
required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly
had thereunder.
2. The proposed final plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and
the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St.
Louis Park.
3. The proposed plat is situated upon the following described lands in Hennepin County,
Minnesota, to-wit:
Parcel 1:
Lot 2, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, and that part of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD
PARK, lying Easterly of a line drawn from a point on the North line of said lot
distant 64.51 feet Westerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot to a point on the
South line of said Lot distant 68.97 feet Westerly of the Southeast corner of said
Lot, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document No.
3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Parcel 2:
Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, except that part of Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD
PARK shown as Parcel 45 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of
Way Plat Numbered 27-23 recorded as Document No. 5062849, also described as
that part of said Lot 3 lying easterly of a straight line from Corner B9 to Corner B25
on said Plat 27-23, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as
Document No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County,
Minnesota
(Abstract property)
Conclusion
1. The proposed final plat of Metropoint is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being
in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the
laws of the State of Minnesota, provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the
City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk subject to the following conditions:
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 12
a. Park and Trail Dedication was already committed by the property underlying the Preliminary
Plat of Metropoint for the construction of Shelard Park; for that reason, no additional Park and
Trail Dedication fees are required.
b. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e.
electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-
site.
c. Subdivision variances approved as part of the Preliminary Plat in Resolution 09-150 are
continued.
d. Developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this
approval.
2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the
above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein.
3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein,
and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon
the said plat when all of the conditions set forth in Paragraph No. 1 above and the St. Louis Park Ordinance
Code have been fulfilled.
4. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section
26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance
therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described and shall entitle such plat
to be placed on record forthwith without further formality.
The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County
Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council , 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 13
RESOLUTION NO. 10-___
RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER
SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE
RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED O-OFFICE
LOCATED AT 435 FORD ROAD, 400 HIGHWAY 169, AND 600 HIGHWAY 169
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Preliminary PUD on November 2, 2009, Resolution
No. 09-151; and
WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received
on January 19, 2010 from the applicant, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD at the meeting of February 24,
2010, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD on a 5-0 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.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Interchange Investors, LLC and GSH Lodging have made application to the City Council for a
Planned Unit Development under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the O-Office
district located at 435 Ford Road, 400 Highway 169, and 600 Highway 169 for the legal description as
follows, to-wit:
Parcel 1:
Lot 2, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, AND that part of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, lying
Easterly of
a line drawn from a point on the North line of said lot distant 64.51 feet Westerly of the
Northeast corner of said Lot to a point on the South line of said Lot distant 68.97 feet Westerly of
the Southeast corner of said Lot, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document
No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Parcel 2:
Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, except that part of Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK shown as
Parcel 45 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 27-23 recorded
as Document No. 5062849, also described as that part of said Lot 3 lying easterly of a straight line
from Corner B9 to Corner B25 on said Plat 27-23, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK
recorded as Document No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 14
Parcel 10:
Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, except that part thereof lying Easterly of a line drawn from a
point on the North line of said lot distant 64.51 feet Westerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot to a
point on the South line of said Lot distant 68.97 feet Westerly of the Southeast corner of said Lot,
according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document No. 3798450 in the office of the
County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Parcel 11:
That part of the East 10 rods of the West Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 117,
Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian lying Southerly of that part of Lot 1, Block 7,
SHELARD PARK, Hennepin county, Minnesota, which lies within said West Half and lying
Northerly of a line drawn Easterly from and perpendicular to the West line of said East 10 rods, from
a point on said West line distant 36 feet Southerly, as measured along said West line, from the most
Westerly corner of said Lot 1, to the East line of said West Half and there terminating; according to
the Government Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case
No. 09-19-PUD) and the effect of the proposed PUD on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of
the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the
surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the
Zoning Ordinance.
3. The City Council has determined that the PUD will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or
general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious
traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has
also determined that the proposed PUD is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning
Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements
of Section 36-367(b)(5). The specific modifications include:
a. Setback and yard requirements for the hotel portion of the PUD shall be reduced to 0. All other
setbacks within the PUD shall be maintained in existing condition per the official exhibits.
b. Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA) requirements shall be reduced from 12% to 6% to
account for park dedication completed through the plat of SHELARD PARK, Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
c. Landscape alternatives per Section 36-364-(g) are approved in accordance with the official exhibits.
4. The contents of Planning Case File 09-19-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public
hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The Final Planned Unit Development at the location described is approved based on the findings set forth
above and subject to the following conditions:
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 15
1. Prior to starting any site work, the following conditions shall be met:
a. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction and City
representatives.
b. All necessary permits must be obtained.
c. Specifications for tree protection and erosion control fencing must be submitted and approved by
the City Forester. Required tree protection and erosion control fencing must be installed prior to
grading activities.
2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the following conditions shall be met:
a. Plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and Zoning Administrator to ensure that all proposed
utilities, public access points and construction documents conform to the requirements of the City
Code of Ordinances and City policies.
b. To ensure construction of the landscaping, other required public improvements, and the cleaning
of public streets during construction, a financial guarantee shall be provided in the amount of
125% of the cost of the landscaping materials and other required public improvements.
c. The planned installation of any mechanical or utility equipment, including but not limited to
emergency generators and utility cabinets, shall include means to ensure full screening from off-site
view.
3. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no construction activity
between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.
b. Loud equipment shall be kept as far as possible from residences at all times.
c. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighborhood properties.
d. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary.
e. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties.
f. The City shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a public street. Work in a
public street shall take place only upon the determination by the Director of Public Works that
appropriate safety measures have been taken to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety.
g. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in order to
mitigate the impact of construction on surrounding properties.
4. Prior to the issuance of any temporary or permanent occupancy permit the following shall be
completed:
a. Fire lanes shall be signed and striped in accordance with the signed Official Exhibits.
b. Landscaping and irrigation shall be in accordance with the signed Official Exhibits.
c. Exterior building improvements shall be completed in accordance with the signed Official Exhibits
and approved materials and colors.
d. All roof top mechanical equipment shall be installed and it shall be demonstrated that all such
equipment is fully screened from off-site views. The painting of mechanical equipment shall not be
considered screening.
5. No outside storage is permitted. Incidental outside storage shall be removed within 48 hours.
6. Sidewalks shall be maintained at all times in good repair to allow for adequate pedestrian access to and
from the site. To protect the health, welfare and safety of residents, customers, and employees, snow
removal on all sidewalks shall begin with a trigger depth of ½”, with a continuous effort until the snow
event has ceased and complete cleanup has occurred.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 16
7. All sidewalks shall be maintained free from ice at all times.
8. Snow must be hauled from the site to an off-site location.
9. To ensure pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular safety, the installation of any on-site traffic calming measures
not indicated on the official exhibits, including speed bumps, shall require a major amendment to the
Planned Unit Development.
10. Architectural standards shall be maintained in accordance with the official exhibits; any design
modifications reducing the amount of Class I materials shall require a major amendment to the PUD.
11. All utility lines and structures must be placed underground or inside the building. Staff shall verify that
construction documents include the placement of all utilities lines or structures underground or inside the
building prior to issuance of the building permit.
12. Construction plans shall indicate the location of the concrete wash-out area, which shall not be located on
any required landscaping areas.
13. Lot 1, Block 1 of METROPOINT is currently used for landscaping purposes only, but is suitable for
future development. Any such development, except for the further development of outdoor landscape
amenities, shall require a major amendment to the Planned Unit Development.
14. The developer shall pay an administrative fine of $750.00 per violation of any condition of this approval.
In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per
violation of any condition of this approval.
Pursuant to Section 36-367(e)(6) of the Zoning Ordinance, the City may require execution of a development
agreement as a condition of approval of the Final PUD. The development agreement shall address those
issues which the City Council deems appropriate and necessary. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized
to execute the development agreement.
The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County
Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Project Narrative
Proposed Hotel at Metropoint
Northwest Quadrant of Interstate 394 and Highway 169
Prepared By:
CSM, BPG Properties, LTD., ESG Architects and Alliant Engineering
January 15, 2010
For Submission of:
Final Subdivision/Preliminary Plat Application, Final Planned Unit Development Application and
Easement Vacation
Project Overview
CSM is proposing to build a seven-story, 162 room hotel on a vacant site within the Metropoint office
campus. Currently Metropoint is a four building office campus with over 918,000 square feet of tenant
space strategically located in the northwest quadrant of Interstate 394 and Highway 169. The proposed
hotel site was previously occupied by a restaurant/night club building, that was removed in the fall of
2003. The parcel for the hotel will be divided primarily from the existing 600 building parcel. In
addition to the proposed hotel parcel, Interchange Investor’s LLC is also seeking the subdivision of a lot
that was previously occupied by a movie theater removed in the fall of 2006. The future use for the “old
theater site” has not been determined, but is anticipated to be a complimentary use to the exiting office
buildings, proposed hotel and adjacent residential neighborhood.
The site is zoned “O-Office”, and is currently governed by a Special Permit. City staff has advised the
property owner and hotel developer that application is necessary for Preliminary and Final Planned Unit
Development for the existing 400, 435 and 600 Metropoint sites, including the proposed hotel. In
addition Subdivision/Preliminary and Final Plat will also be necessary.
Current Project Submittal Request
Final Subdivision/Plat Approval
Final Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Easement Vacation
Preliminary Plat
Per Section 26-154 of the St. Louis Park Zoning Code, 10’ easements are required along all lot lines. The
proposed plat provides the required 10’ easements along all property lines, except for two locations. A 5’
easement is only able to be provided along the west side of Lot 3, due to the proposed hotel porte-
cochere. Also, a 5’ easement is only able to be provided along the south side of Lot 1, due to the presence
of the existing parking ramp for the 600 building. It is our understanding that Easement Variances are
required for these two areas and consequently requested.
Proposed Hotel Use
The proposed plan is to construct a seven-story, 162 room hotel. The intent of the hotel is not to act as
typical stand alone property. The hotel is intended to be a complimentary use to the existing Metropoint
office campus and adjacent properties, such as the General Mills corporate campus, in addition to
providing service for the area.
1 of 5
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 17
Site Setbacks
The Planned Unit Development zoning allows for 0’ setbacks.
Site Access
Users of the hotel will access the site from Ford Road through a new circle drive constructed in 2008. We
are proposing to extend the circle drive for the hotel porte-cochere. Once checked into the hotel a guest
will either be directed around the building to the east parking lot or to adjacent parking ramps which will
have dedicated hotel parking. Due to the office campus setting, the area on the west side of the hotel,
south of the main entry, is proposed to be a multimodal (vehicular/pedestrian) plaza. A driver will
recognize that they are not on a typical drive lane and should reduce their speed in consideration of
pedestrians in this area. The plaza will include colored concrete to differentiate pedestrian and vehicular
areas, lighting, trees, shrubs and perennial plantings. Immediately adjacent the multimodal plaza is an
outdoor dining area for the hotel.
Sanitary Sewer and Water
The proposed hotel does require a new private sanitary sewer and water main service but will maintain
and utilize the same public connections. The existing sanitary stub and easterly manhole will be removed
to a manhole just 24’ west of the proposed building on the proposed lot. The proposed building will
connect a new 6” sanitary service to this existing manhole. The existing line discharges to Ford Road
Right of Way.
The project will maintain a looped water main system by rerouting an 8” and 6” water main around the
proposed building and supply the building with a 6” combined fire and domestic service. The looped
system will provide the hotel with a redundant water supply system as well as service all existing
hydrants. One hydrant will also be relocated from a proposed driveway into a new green area. The night
club that previously occupied this lot used the same loop for fire and domestic service.
Storm Water Management
The proposed hotel and surrounding improvements fall under redevelopment standards for the City of
Saint Louis Park and the Bassett Creek Watershed District (BCWD). The City requires no peak rate
increase from existing conditions in of storm water discharge for the 1, 10, and 100-year rainfall events.
In addition, the proposed 100-year peak discharge rate must not exceed the existing 10-year discharge
rate. The BCWD redevelopment standards enforce non-degradation policy for downstream phosphorous
loading. No increase of phosphorous may be evident in storm water runoff.
The hotel development proposes a pond to meet both city rate control requirements as well as the BCWD
water quality requirements. Proposed storm sewer infrastructure has been designed to collect and deposit
the hotel roof and the majority of impervious runoff and discharge it into the proposed pond. The pond
has been designed to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and BCWD standards to treat storm water for
phosphorous and sediment removal. To meet the city rate control requirements, the pond will have a
controlled outlet to provide retention above the normal water level for larger storm water events. The
pond discharges through the existing onsite storm sewer and eventually to Ford Road Right of Way. The
pond effectively meets all requirements for both the City and Watershed District.
2 of 5
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 18
Landscaping
The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum number of trees and shrubs within section (d) of the
Landscape Ordinance and also provides alternative landscape options within section (g). The proposed
hotel is 93,650 SF and at the required one tree per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area would equate to 94
over story trees, which as discussed with staff is not realistic. A Landscape Plan has been developed for
the hotel site that uses many of the same native plants and ornamental grasses, recently installed on the
Metropoint campus. The character of the landscape is intended to reflect the simple lines and modern
character of the building(s). A courtyard has been developed on the east side of the building, which
incorporates a fire pit and seating areas for gathering, that overlooks a pond that will be encompassed by
a pathway lined with perennial plantings, benches and decorative lighting. The Landscape Plan also
provides screening of adjacent parking and loading areas to the north of the hotel site. In addition to the
hotel site landscaping the property owner is proposing to install a sidewalk with benches and plantings
along the 169 Frontage Road from the 400 building, along the front of the hotel, south to the former
Santorini Restaurant site.
Due to the required PUD, the existing 400, 435 and 600 buildings/parcels are subject to the designed
outdoor recreation area/plaza (DORA) and tree & shrub requirements. As part of an overall planned
renovations effort for the existing Metropoint campus, landscape and building improvements have been
made, which required a considerable investment on the part of the property owner. The site
improvements implemented in 2008 included new circle drives, large quarried stones, over 9,000
perennials, including large areas of native ornamental grasses, a rain garden and flowering perennials. A
letter to Adam Fulton, St. Louis Park Associate Planner, and dated 8-18-09, further details the DORA and
tree and shrub requirements compliance.
Parking
The Zoning Ordinance requires 1.5 parking spaces, per hotel guest room. The 162 room hotel is required
to provide 243 parking stalls. We are proposing to provide 51 hotel parking spaces with 128 dedicated
hotel parking spaces within the existing parking facilities, for a total provided of 179 spaces. Metropoint
is currently over parked and has large areas of vacant parking. It is our understanding that the parking
deficiency will be a condition of the PUD.
Construction Staging
This is a confined site and the contractors will have to be conscientious of adjacent street, offices and
residents. The staging of construction material will be primarily on the east side of the proposed hotel,
along with some construction parking. Additional construction parking will be in existing parking
facilities and coordinated with Metropoint management.
Architectural Design and Building Materials
The architectural expression of this 7 story stand alone structure would best be described as “clean
modern”. Due to the proximity of the surrounding corporate buildings, simple rectilinear massing and
deliberate uses of common materials and colors will be used to unify the new hotel into the larger
corporate campus. Large white masses of stucco and metal panel project and frame the inner mass of the
building. The use of dark bronze metal panel and widow mullions and dark stone/pre cast base which
contrast with the white elements will directly relate visually to the neighboring structures. The
introduction of a warm colored stucco on the basic (or inner) mass of the building will act to differentiate
the hotel use and help to create a more inviting look for the hotel. Additional materials at the first level
such as brick, storefront glass, decorative metal fencing, and terra cotta panels will enhance the pedestrian
experience on both sides of the building. Simply put, the building is a collection of interlocking and
3 of 5
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 19
interconnected boxes which tie to the surrounding Metropoint campus as well as other neighboring
campuses such as General Mills.
For purposes of material classification, 70% of exterior materials are class 1, and 30% are class 2.
Class 1 materials include: stucco (white and buff color) 43%
Room and corridor windows 17%
Store front windows 4%
Terra cotta masonry panels 4%
Brick 2%
Class 2 materials include: Metal panel (white & dark bronze) 20%
*these panels are high quality panels
Decorative metal (windows & coping) 7%
Polished precast base 3%
Functionally, the building’s first floor is occupied with an extensive branded hotel lobby lounge and
dining areas. Additionally, meeting rooms, pool and fitness, front offices, and back of house spaces are
located on the first floor. Floors 2 – 7 are exclusively guest rooms. Hotel arrival (west side) is sheltered
by a large porte-cochere and smaller sheltered vestibule area. Arrival and entry to the meeting entry (east
side) is via a small plaza and sheltered vestibule area. Adjacent to lounge, pool, and meeting areas is an
outdoor courtyard with soft and hard seating and fire pit. Adjacent to the indoor dining will be an outdoor
dining area hugging the hotel building in the plaza which links the 600 tower with the hotel. Both the
outdoor dining and the outdoor courtyard will be separated with a decorative metal fence do to sale of
liquor within the hotel’s lobby and dining areas.
4 of 5
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 20
WAYZATA BLVD
FORD RD
INTERSTATE 394 HIGHWAY 169 SSB HWY169 S TO WB I394
FORD LN
EB I394 TO NB HWY169 S
NB HWY169 S TO WB I394
S
H
E
L
A
R
D
P
K
W
Y
EB I394 TO SB HWY169 S
SB HWY169 S TO EB I394HIGHWAY 169 SWAYZATA BLVD
FORD RDINTERSTATE 394
CSM / Marriot Hotel Preliminary PUD and Plat
$
October 7, 2009
3
X Zoning Classification
R1 - Single Family Residential
R2 - Single Family Residential
R3 - Two Family Residential
R4 - Multi-Familiy Residential
RC - Multi-Family Residential
POS - Parks and Open Space
MX - Mixed-Use
C1 - Neighborhood Commercial
C2 - General Commercial
O - Office
IP - Industrial Park
IG - General Industrial
360
Feet
POS RC
C2O
RC
O
O
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 21
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 22
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c) Page 23
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 24
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 25
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 26
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 27
COurtyard minneapOlis west
st. louis park, minnesota
17 august 2009 scale = 1:20 0 5 10 20
Elevations
west elevation
stucco: Color 2
(alternate: metal panel)
metal panel: Color 4
metal Cap Flashing : Color 3
stucco: Color 2
(alternate: metal panel)
stucco: Color 1
metal panel: Color 4
metal trim: Color 3
Brick: Color 6
(alternate: Glazed Block)
precast: Color 7
(polished)
store Front Glazingmetal panel: Color 2precast: Color 7
(polished)
Brick: Color 5
(alternate: terracotta
wall system)
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 28
COurtyard minneapOlis west
st. louis park, minnesota
17 august 2009 scale = 1:20 0 5 10 20
Elevations
south elevation north elevation
stucco: Color 2
(alternate: metal panel)
Brick: Color 5
(alternate: terracotta
wall system)
metal Cap Flashing : Color 3
stucco: Color 1
metal trim: Color 3
Brick: Color 6
(alternate: Glazed Block)
precast: Color 7
(polished)precast: Color 7
(polished)
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 29
COurtyard minneapOlis west
st. louis park, minnesota
17 august 2009
Summaries
BaCK OF HOuse spaCe GsFFront desk/reception (in lobby) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 705luggage storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0prep Kitchen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 715employee Break . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .360maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0General storage (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145meCH/eleC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445laundry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .355janitor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30
suBtOtal BaCK OF HOuse spaCe 2,755
CirCulatiOn and net tO GrOss 2,801
a. tOtal GsF - nOn-GuestrOOm areas 16,314
puBliC spaCe spaCe GsFlobby (including: dining, Bar, reception, market, media pods, . . . . . . . . lounge, library, theatre, Business Center & Vestibule) . . . . . 4,580public restrooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380divisible meeting room . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1,195meeting rooms (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,015Board room . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .335prefunction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418exercise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .745pool/toilets/pool mech/pool stor. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,090
suBtOtal puBliC spaCe 10,758
GuestrOOms
1. King room (13’-6”x26’-0”=351 sF) @ 109 rooms 38,259
2. Queen/Queen room (13’-6”x29’-0”=392 sF) @ 43 rooms 16,856
3. King suite (621 sF) @ 5 room 3,105
4. QQ suite (13’-6”x41’-0”=554 sF) @ 5 rooms 2,770
GuestrOOms nsF 60,990
Keys = 162 376 nsF/Key
COrridOrs, stairs, eleVatOrs, sHaFts, HK, stOraGe 16,346
B. tOtal GsF - GuestrOOm areas 77,336
GsF GsF/Key
@162 Keys
a. Hotel public/Back of House 16,314 101
B. Hotel Guestrooms 77,336 477
C. tOtal HOtel GsF 93,650 578
level K QQ
(or K H.C.)King suite QQ suite total Keys
2 19 8 --27
3 18 7 1 1 27
4 18 7 1 1 27
5 18 7 1 1 27
6 18 7 1 1 27
7 18 7 1 1 27
tOtal 109 (67%) 43 (27%)
5 (3%)5 (3%) 162 (100%)
HOtel rOOm summary
HOtel spaCe summary
GrOss sQuare FOOt summarylevel 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,314level 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,446level 3 (typical). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,978level 4-7 (12,978 x 4=) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,912
tOtal 93,650
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 30
COurtyard minneapOlis west
st. louis park, minnesota
17 august 2009
Conceptual Rendering
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 31
COurtyard minneapOlis west
st. louis park, minnesota
17 august 2009
aerial View looking northwest (Conference Center entry)
Aerial Context
aerial View looking southeast (main entry)aerial looking southwest
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 6c)
Page 32
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
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:
Gambling Premises Permit for Minneapolis Northeast Lions Club.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution approving issuance of a premises permit for lawful gambling to be
conducted by Minneapolis Northeast Lions Club at Texa-Tonka Lanes located at 8200 Minnetonka
Boulevard in St. Louis Park.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to approve a premises permit for Minneapolis Northeast Lions Club to
operate pull tabs at Texa-Tonka Lanes located at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard?
BACKGROUND:
Minneapolis Northeast Lions Club has submitted an application for a premises permit to conduct
lawful gambling in the form of pull-tabs inside Texa-Tonka Lanes at 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard in
St. Louis Park. Community Charities currently holds a premises permit at Texa-Tonka Lanes but
the lease agreement for the use of the space expires on March 31, 2010. Texa-Tonka Lanes has
chosen to lease the use of their space to the Minneapolis Northeast Lions Club starting on April 1,
2010 to conduct lawful gambling.
Chartered in 1940, the Minneapolis Northeast Lions are involved in fundraisers, volunteerism and
many projects to benefit communities. The Minneapolis Northeast Lions Club currently operates six
(6) gambling sites in the cities of Minneapolis, Fridley, St. Anthony and Robbinsdale.
City Code Section 15-8 requires each organization conducting lawful gambling within the city to
expend 90 percent of its lawful purpose expenditures within the trade area of St. Louis Park which
includes Minneapolis, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka, Plymouth and Golden Valley. The city does
not have authority on what specific lawful purpose expenditures must be made. That authority rests
with the organization and its membership.
City Code Section 15-8 requires organizations to submit monthly gambling reports. The required
reports are a copy of the monthly Schedule C/D – LG1010 submitted to the State Gambling Board.
In July of 2009, the State Legislature made changes to gambling law statutes regarding the renewal
of premises permits. Previously, licenses were issued for a two year term. Organizations are no
longer required to renew their premises permits. Licenses issued are now perpetual and are valid
unless suspended or revoked by the Board, terminated by the organization, or if the license lapses. A
license will be considered lapsed if the organization does any of the following (MN Statute 349.16):
City Council Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
• Failed to conduct and report any gambling sales activity within seven months from the
date of the last gambling activity.
• Failed to have a gambling manager as required.
• Failed to pay annual license and permit fees.
• Surrenders, withdraws, or otherwise terminates the license and files a termination plan.
The Police Department has conducted a background investigation on the organization and its
officers found no concerns. Should the City Council approve the application, the resolution of
approval will be forwarded to the State Gambling Control Board who regulates state gambling and is
responsible for issuing the gambling premises permit.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Organizations authorized to conduct lawful gambling are required to pay to the city on a monthly
basis a local gambling tax in the amount of 0.0010 percent (one tenth of one percent) of the gross
receipts of a licensed organization from all lawful gambling less prizes actually paid out by the
organization.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Non Applicable.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Kris Luedke, Office Assistant
Review by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 10 -_____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ISSUANCE OF A PREMISES PERMIT
FOR LAWFUL GAMBLING TO BE CONDUCTED BY
MINNEAPOLIS NORTHEAST LIONS CLUB
AT TEXA-TONKA LANES
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 349 and St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Chapter
15 provide for lawful gambling licensing by the State Gambling Control Board; and
WHEREAS, a licensed organization conducting gambling on a premises within the City of
St. Louis Park must expend 90 percent of its lawful purpose expenditures on lawful purposes
conducted or located within the trade area; and
WHEREAS, a licensed organization is required to submit monthly gambling reports to the
City Clerk’s office on a timely basis; and
WHEREAS, a licensed organization may not conduct lawful gambling at any site unless it
has first obtained from the Board a premises permit for the site; and
WHEREAS, the Board may not issue a premises permit unless the organization submits a
resolution from the City Council approving the premises permit; therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED by the City of St. Louis Park City Council that the applicant listed
above meets the criteria necessary to receive a premises permit, and the application is hereby
approved.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 15, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
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:
Panera Bread – Major Amendment to Planned Unit Development for Additional Signage.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Major Amendment to the Planned Unit Development
for additional signage, subject to conditions as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission.
(Note – the resolution recommended for adoption represents an amendment to the resolution
originally adopted in 1996 at the time the Park Place Plaza Planning Unit Development was
approved. The new language is underlined)
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
This request is consistent with the current sign plan approved with the Park Place Plaza Planned
Unit Development.
BACKGROUND:
Zoning: General Commercial (C-2)
Comprehensive Plan: Commercial
Applicant: Panera, LLC.
Description of Request:
The applicant is proposing to amend the approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow a
wall sign on the west side of the recently constructed Panera Bread building.
Location:
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
REQUEST:
Panera is asking for a Major Amendment to the PUD to allow a sign on the west side of their
building.
A building permit was issued in 2009 for the construction of a 4,000 square foot addition to the
west side of the shopping center containing PetSmart and Office Max. The addition was built
specifically for a new Panera Bread Restaurant. The building permit indicated that Panera intended
to install signs on the north (front of the store), west side (facing Home Depot) and south side of the
building (facing Cedar Lake Rd). The new Panera building, however, is part of the Park Place Plaza
Planned Unit Development (PUD), and the approved PUD Agreement allows signage on the front
of the building only.
The proposed amendment would allow signage on the north and west side of the building only.
They are not asking for signage on the south side due to the intense landscaping between the
building and Cedar Lake Rd which would greatly reduce the effectiveness of the signage. Also, the
signage restriction along the south side of all buildings facing Cedar Lake Rd. exists in large part
because of the requests made by the residents of the Sunset Ridge condo and townhome
development located across Cedar Lake Rd. During the initial PUD approval process in 1996, they
expressed concerns about visual impacts of the shopping center resulting from signage, traffic and
lighting.
Park Place Plaza PUD:
The Park Place Plaza Shopping Center PUD received final PUD approval in May of 1996. The
PUD covers all the properties framed in by 16th Street on the north side, Park Place Boulevard to the
east, Cedar Lake Road to the south and Zarthan Avenue to the west. Businesses covered by the
PUD include Costco, Home Depot, PetSmart, and several smaller retail and restaurant uses. Since
1996, the PUD has been amended numerous times to include the larger retail uses, traffic
improvements, the Costco gas station, and most recently in 2004 to allow an expanded garden
center for Home Depot.
In 1998, the PUD was amended to allow additional signage for Office Max. The Office Max
approval is very similar to the current request in that it allowed signage on the side of the building
(east side), not the rear side facing Cedar Lake Rd.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 3
View of Office Max sign taken from the intersection of Cedar Lake Rd and Park Place Blvd. This
sign is the result of the 1998 PUD amendment.
This picture shows the Sunset Ridge residential development in the background. The Panera
building shown in the picture is the front wall, so the proposed Panera sign would be located around
the corner.
Office Max sign
Sunset Ridge Condos
and Townhomes
Panera front
wall
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 4
The aerial above shows how the proposed sign would relate to the residential properties to the south.
The sign would be pointed directly to the west, and most visible to traffic traveling east on Cedar
Lake Rd. Channel letter such as these tend to be most bright when viewed from directly in front of
the sign. The brightness of the sign diminishes when you view it from the side.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 5
Architectural Style and Materials
The design of the new building is consistent with the architecture of the existing building. The
signage however will vary slightly from that of Office Max and PetSmart. The existing signage
consists of simple channel letters (see photo below). The proposed Panera sign also utilizes channel
letters. However, unlike the existing tenants, the letters would be mounted on a trapezoidal
architectural detail. The proposed detail does not violate the PUD agreements or zoning
regulations, and therefore, is not part of the amendment request.
Panera
West
Front
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 6
Planning Commission:
A Major Amendment to a PUD requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission. A
public hearing was conducted on March 3, 2010. No comments were received at the hearing. The
Commission recommended approval (4-0). A copy of the meeting minutes is attached.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable
Attachments: Draft Resolution – Major Amendment to PUD
Sign details on west side of the building
Site Plan
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 7
RESOLUTION NO. _________
Amends and Restates Resolutions 96-89, 96-158, 97-3, 97-39, 98-23,
00-037, 00-133, 01-080, 02-072, 05-036
A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 05-036 APPROVED ON
MARCH 7, 2005 AMENDING A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)
UNDER SECTION 14:6-7 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING
TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT,
LOCATED AT 5600, 5640, 5680, 5700, 5800 and 5900 CEDAR LAKE ROAD; AND
1620, 1650, 1690 AND 1700 PARK PLACE BOULEVARD; AND
5601, 5699 AND 5799 WEST 16TH STREET AND1625 ZARTHAN AVENUE
(TOTAL SITE FORMERLY KNOWN AS 1625 ZARTHAN AVENUE)
MAJOR AMENDMENT FOR WALL SIGN
PANERA BREAD
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Zoning Ordinance permits shopping centers in excess
of 200,000 square feet by Planned Unit Development (PUD) under certain conditions in the C-2
Commercial Zoning District, and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 96-38 approving the Preliminary
PUD on March 18, 1996, and
WHEREAS, the City staff were informed on April 12, 1996 that certain environmental
remediation would be necessary and such remediation would affect the timing process of demolition
of the existing building and resulted in the need to amend the conditions of preliminary approval,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 96-71 rescinding Resolution No.
96-38 and approving the Preliminary PUD subject to certain revised conditions on May 6, 1996,
and
WHEREAS, a complete application for a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) was
received on April 26, 1996, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD application at the meeting
of May 1, 1996, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD subject to
17 conditions of approval on a 3-1 vote with three members present voting in the affirmative and
one member voting against, and
WHEREAS, the City Council received an overview from City staff and the City Attorney of
the necessary agreements related to the PUD at its May 13, 1996 Study Session, and
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 8
WHEREAS, the applicant and current and prospective property owners have entered into a
development agreement, supplemental development agreements, sidewalk easements agreement,
reciprocal easement and operation agreement, and a reversion agreement, which agreement nullifies
and voids without any further action required on the part of the City Council the preliminary and
final approval if certain conditions are not met, and
WHEREAS, on March 3, 1997 Franchise Associates, Inc. (current owner of 1690 Park Place
Boulevard) and Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc. as developer and with the consent
of Honeywell, Inc. (fee owner of 1625 Zarthan Avenue) submitted an application for a minor
amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow the use of neon on the building at 1690 Park Place
Boulevard and to revise the Landscape Plan for 1625 Zarthan Avenue and 5600, 5640 and 5680
Cedar Lake Road, and
WHEREAS, certain amendments to the approved Final PUD have been approved by the
City Council on 10/22/96 (Res. 96-158) and 1/6/97 (Res 97-3), and 3/17/97 (Res 97-39), and
WHEREAS, on December 11, 1997 Office Max (current owner of 5600 Cedar Lake Road)
and Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc. as developer and with the consent of
Honeywell, Inc. (fee owner of 1625 Zarthan Avenue) submitted an application for a minor
amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow the placement of a new 12.8 s.f. flat wall
identification sign on the east face of the building at 5600 Cedar Lake Road.
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2000 Costco Wholesale and Ryan Companies US, Inc as
developer with the consent of Honeywell, Inc. submitted an application for a major amendment to
the approved Final PUD to allow the construction of a 139,444 square foot wholesale, retail and tire
service facility at 5801 West 16th Street.
WHEREAS, on October 23, 2000 Costco Wholesale and Ryan Companies US, Inc. as
developer with the consent of Honeywell, inc. submitted a minor amendment to the approved Final
PUD to allow changes to the traffic improvements at 16th Street and the main access into the site.
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 01-133 on November 6, 2000
approving a minor amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow changes to the traffic
improvements at 16th Street and the main access into the site, and
WHEREAS, on April 16, 2001, Costco Wholesale filed an application seeking a major
amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to construct a fueling
facility on Lot 9, and
WHEREAS, on June 20, 2001, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received
testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 4-0 moved that the Planning
Commission deny the proposed major amendment to the PUD, and
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 9
WHEREAS, on July 16, 2001, the City Council considered the request for a major
amendment, and on a vote of 7-0 moved to continue to the request, and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 01-080 on August 20, 2001
approving a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to
construct a fueling facility on Lot 9, and
WHEREAS, on June 7, 2002, Costco Wholesale filed an application seeking a minor
amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to construct a
wholesale liquor addition on Lot 1, and
WHEREAS, on December 2, 2004, Home Depot USA, Inc. filed an application seeking a
minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to construct an
addition of 5, 764 square feet to the existing garden center on Lot 2, Block 1, Park Place Plaza, and
WHEREAS, on January 19, 2010, Panera, LLC filed an application seeking a major
amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Place Plaza to allow a wall sign on
the west side of the Panera Bread building on Lot 3, Block 1, Park Place Plaza.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park:
A. Recitals
The recitals set forth above are incorporated herein and made part of this resolution.
B. Findings
1. Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, Inc., as developer with the consent of the property
owner Honeywell, Inc., has made application to the City Council for approval of a Final Planned
Unit Development (“Final PUD”) within the C-2 General Commercial Zoning District under
Section 14:6-7 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance for property formerly known as 1625 Zarthan
Avenue for the legal description as follows, to-wit:
Lots 1-9 and Outlots A, B and C; Block 1, Park Place Plaza (Torrens)
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission
(Case No. 95-51-PUD) and the effect of the proposed Final PUD and amendments thereto on the
health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the
Comprehensive Plan, with specific consideration given to the Plan By Neighborhood Section of the
Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The City Council has determined that approval of a Final PUD and the proposed amendments
thereto will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with
certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 10
will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also determined that the
proposed Final PUD and amendments thereto are in harmony with the general provisions, purpose
and intent of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and its Comprehensive Plan and that the requested
modifications comply with the requirements of Section 14:6-7.2(E).
4. The contents of Planning Case Files 95-51-PUD, 02-38-PUD, 04-70-PUD, and 10-01-PUD are
hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this
case.
C. Conditions and Approval
A Final PUD at the location described in paragraph 1 of the above findings is approved based on the
recitals and the findings set forth above, the Approved Final Plans, and subject to the following
conditions:
1. Issuance of demolition and erosion control permits shall be subject to the following
conditions as required in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Resolution and
subsequently modified on March 18, 1996 and May 6, 1996 as follows:
a. Demolition, hauling and construction activities shall be limited to the hours between
7:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on weekends and
holidays.
b. Trucks and construction equipment shall be prohibited from using Zarthan Avenue
between Cedar Lake Road and 16th Street and shall enter and exit the site from 16th
Street and Park Place Boulevard only.
c. During demolition of the existing building, the western wall of the building shall be
left intact as a sound barrier for as long as practicable.
d. Use of explosives shall be prohibited.
e. All demolition and construction equipment shall utilize state of the art muffler
systems.
f. On-site crushing and recycling operations shall be located as far from existing
residential land uses as practicable.
2. Approval of the Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development and Plat shall be subject
to the following conditions as required in the EAW Resolution and subsequently modified
on March 18, 1996 and by this resolution as follows:
a. Installation of all roadway improvements associated with anticipated traffic from the
proposed use and dedication of public right-of-way to accommodate public
infrastructure.
b. Adjustments to existing traffic lights, street lights and other utilities.
c. Installation of sidewalks along the length of Cedar Lake Road, Park Place Boulevard,
16th Street, and Zarthan Avenue adjacent to the project and connecting to public
plaza areas within the site.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 11
d. Dedication of drainage and utility easements to a depth of 10 feet back from planned
right-of-way and execution of a sidewalks easement agreement. Such sidewalk
easements shall extend 1 foot beyond required perimeter sidewalks.
e. Installation of on-site directional signs to I-394 and Highway 100 to prevent
unnecessary traffic in residential neighborhoods.
f. Delivery and garbage service trucks shall be prohibited from using Zarthan Avenue
between Cedar Lake Road and 16th Street and shall be limited to servicing the uses
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and
10:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays. Unoccupied delivery and garbage trucks shall
be prohibited from idling on site during nighttime hours as defined by Section 11-
507(3)(a).
g. Overnight parking of vehicles, semi-trailers, refrigeration units and the like shall be
prohibited unless parked wholly within any of the enclosed loading dock bays.
h. Openings of rooftop fans and air circulation equipment shall be required to face
away from residential neighborhoods and all exhaust openings except bathroom fans
shall be prohibited on exterior walls facing residential neighborhoods. In the event
bathroom fan exhausts exceed the maximum nighttime allowable noise limits,
operation of these fans shall be terminated until compliance with the City of St.
Louis Park Noise Ordinance is achieved.
i Compliance with ordinance provisions relating to exterior lighting and prevention of
unnecessary nighttime site lighting.
j. Compliance with all applicable City ordinance provisions shall be required unless
modifications are specifically authorized by this Final Planned Unit Development
approval or by more stringent requirements of the development agreement or
supplemental development agreements.
3. The following modifications to ordinance requirements are authorized as part of this Final
PUD approval:
a. Bufferyards are not required between drive through facilities and adjacent properties
that are part of the Final PUD.
b. The temporary hoop structures associated with Home Depot’s “Garden Center”
outdoor sales area are not required to be architecturally integrated with the principal
building (utilize same building materials) provided masonry walls surrounding the
outdoor sales area are provided as shown on the Approved Final Plans.
c. A Bufferyard “D” may be substituted for the required Bufferyard “F” between the
truck circulation and loading areas for the Retail/Service/Restaurant building on Lot
5 and Park Place Boulevard.
d. Buildings are not required to utilize at least 60% brick or other natural stone on each
building face but are approved with percentages of brick and other materials as
shown on the Approved Final Plans.
e. Buildings on Lots 2 and 3 may have more than 5% bright, pure accent colors on
each facade and are approved with the percentages of accent colors shown on colored
elevations “stamped” as received by the City on March 15, 1996 and on April 19,
1996 (Exhibits B2 and B3 of the Approved Final Plans).
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 12
f. The area of all wall signs may exceed 7% of the building wall area but may not
exceed the wall sign area shown on the Approved Final Plans. Exhibit A7 of the
Approved Final Plans shall be revised to reduce cumulative wall signage by at least 37
square feet in accordance with the Preliminary PUD approval.
g. Individual wall signs may exceed 150 square feet but may not exceed the individual
wall sign areas shown on the Approved Final Plans.
h. Two free standing “off-premise signs”, advertising uses on properties within the PUD
only, are allowed as shown on the Approved Final Plans. Such signs are denoted on
the Approved Final Plans as “Center Pylon Signs” and also as “Monument Signs”.
Such signs may also be referenced as “Project Identification Signs” or “Tenant
Identification Signs”.
i. The maximum size of the “Center Pylon Sign” faces may exceed 300 square feet and
may be 320 square feet each as shown on the Approved Final Plans.
j. The maximum total sign area of the “Center Pylon Signs” may exceed 400 square
feet and may be 1,280 square feet as shown on the Approved Final Plans.
k. One Monument Sign measuring no more than 4 feet 4 inches in height and 16 feet
in width and identifying only the name of the Shopping Center may be placed in
Outlot A as shown on the Approved Final Plans. Such sign shall include seating on
one side, shall be faced primarily with brick, and shall not be counted toward the
total approved sign areas.
l. Exterior lighting spillover may exceed 1.0 footcandle at property lines that abut other
properties within the Final PUD but may not exceed ordinance restrictions at
property lines that abut properties that are not within the PUD.
m. The Bufferyard “D”s separating the in-vehicle sales and service uses (drive-throughs)
on Lots 4,5,6,7 and 8 of the Plat from 16th Street and Park Place Boulevard are not
required to include a minimum of 95 plant units per 100 linear feet and may include
a total of 225 fewer plant units than required as shown on the Approved Final Plans.
n. Certain canopy trees may be installed at sizes less than 2-1/2” caliper as shown on the
Approved Final Plans and such trees shall be given full plant unit credits.
o. Certain evergreen trees may be installed at sizes less than 6 feet (height) as shown on
the Approved Final Plans and such trees shall be given full plant unit credits.
4. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Approved Final
Plans, which are incorporated herein as Exhibits P1, P2, S1, S2, C1, C2, C3, L1, L2, L3, L4,
L5, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, A6, A7 as revised by condition 3f of this resolution, A8, A9, F1, F2,
F3, F4, F5, F6 (“Park Place Plaza” Monument Sign Detail), B1, B2 and B3, and the
following conditions:
a. MPCA approval of the remediation plan relating to environmental contamination on
the site and conformance with the conditions of the approved remediation plan.
b. Final PUD approval is contingent upon the developer and current/prospective
property owners, including Home Depot, signing the required agreements and
conforming with all provisions of the executed special assessment agreements for
construction of required off-site improvements, executed development agreement
and executed supplemental development agreements that cover all on-site
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 13
improvements within the PUD in accordance with Section 14:6-7.5(F), executed
sidewalk easements agreement, executed reciprocal easements and operation
agreement, and the executed reversion agreement. Wherever there is a conflict
between the requirements of any of said documents, City Code, and/or this
resolution, the more stringent requirements shall apply.
c. The type and colors of all exterior building materials (including building facades,
canopies, screen walls, fences, trash enclosures, and permanent exterior signage)
throughout the Final PUD must match those adopted as part of the Approved Final
Plans, and no exterior building materials other than doors may be surface painted
(this requirement does not prohibit the use of standing seam metal with a baked
enamel finish, as approved). Said doors shall be painted to match the approved brick
or rock face block color. All exterior building materials must be maintained in an
aesthetic manner as determined in the sole discretion of the City.
d. Wherever brick is denoted on the Approved Final Plans, a full 4” thick face brick
must be applied in a masonry technique except that an alternative brick application,
face brick cast in structural panels, is specifically approved for the Home Depot
building on Lot 2. The alternative brick application for Lot 2 must match the color,
texture and visual aesthetics of the brick used throughout the remainder of the PUD.
e. Permanent exterior signage is limited to that shown on the Approved Final Plans.
Additional window signage, temporary banners and the like are restricted in
accordance with the terms of the “Maintenance and Operational Restrictions”
Exhibit of the development agreement and supplemental development agreements.
f. All light poles must be included within curbed areas.
g. All rooftop equipment must be screened from ground level view using parapet walls
and all rooftop equipment must be painted to match the color of the rooftop to
ensure that it is minimally visible from nearby office towers.
h. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the developer must reimburse the City for
all costs incurred by the City in connection with processing the applicant’s PUD,
and preparation and implementation of the development agreements and associated
agreements.
i. In lieu of meeting certain bufferyard requirements as waived in Paragraph 3l above,
the developer shall donate 225 plant units to the City in the form of twenty 2-1/2”
canopy trees by June 1, 1997 for use on nearby lands to provide screening of the
project.
j. The subsequent phase of the PUD is approved in concept only as including 110,000
square feet of gross retail building area, 495 parking spaces and 55 proof of parking
spaces on Lot 1. The details of the subsequent phase shall be reviewed as a minor
amendment to the approved Final PUD, unless additional off-site impacts or
modifications to Code or PUD requirements are anticipated, in which case, the
details of the subsequent phase shall be reviewed as a major amendment.
In either case, the City Council reserves the right to hold a public hearing regarding
the subsequent phase. The subsequent phase shall require amendment to the
development agreement and/or supplemental development agreement for Lot 1.
k. No administrative subdivision of any property within the PUD shall be granted due
to the interrelatedness of the PUD, plat, and Approved Final Plans.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 14
l. The developer and/or property owner shall dedicate, at no expense to the City, any
right-of-way which may be necessary and required in the future to facilitate
improvements at the intersection of 16th Street and Zarthan Avenue and/or to
provide access from Cedar Lake Road into the PUD. Developer and/or property
owner shall be responsible for the costs associated with these potential future
improvements based upon the benefit to the project and/or the demands the project
has placed on the roadway system. Any such improvements would require a major
amendment to the Approved Final Plans for the PUD
m. The developer and/or owner shall obtain all necessary permits to complete any
further required environmental remediation of the site and undertake said
remediation pursuant to local, state and federal regulations, as applicable.
n. The developer shall receive all other necessary permits and approvals from the City
including, but not limited to sanitary sewer, water tapping permit, demolition
permit, building permits, and erosion control permit.
o. The developer shall obtain approval by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as
well as any other approvals required by state and federal agencies, including the
required Indirect Source Permit, and the developer shall comply with all conditions
of said approvals and permits.
p. The Final Plat shall be submitted to the County for recording prior to initiating any
site work relating to construction of the PUD project; evidence of filing of the final
plat or other assurances pertaining to required easements shall be presented to the
City prior to issuance of any permits other than demolition and associated temporary
noise permits.
q. The Preliminary and Final Plat are inherent components of the Preliminary and
Final PUD approvals and are subject to the conditions of Preliminary and Final
PUD approval and the Approved Final Plans. Access to the platted properties shall
be limited to the means provided in the Approved Final Plans.
r. No certificate of occupancy for any building in the PUD shall be issued until all the
circulation drives and internal sidewalks throughout the PUD and all the
improvements, other than landscaping and wear coat of asphalt, for that building’s
lot, have been installed and accepted by the City. All landscaping on the lot shall be
completed within one (1) year from the date the certificate of occupancy is issued.
s. The general public shall have the right to utilize the internal sidewalks for pedestrian
access, including walking bicycles, through the PUD property and for access to the
outdoor seating plaza, which shall remain available to the general public in perpetuity
for passive recreational use that is not disruptive to the operation of the shopping
center. No provision of the reciprocal easement and operations agreement shall be
interpreted as overriding this requirement.
t. The Approved Final Plan Exhibits may be revised to include a 4,450 square feet
Arby’s restaurant on Lot 4 in accordance with the plans reviewed by the Planning
Commission on May 1, 1996, and further revised as follows: to clarify building
materials; to ensure that building materials match materials used throughout the
remainder of the development; and to reduce the width of the metal door on the rear
elevation to a maximum of 8 feet.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 15
u. The obligations and conditions herein imposed on the developer by this Final PUD
shall also apply to any property owner, successor or assign.
v. The City may enforce any provision of this resolution in the same manner as provided
for a violation of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and/or as provided in the development
agreement or supplemental development agreements.
5. The Final PUD shall be amended on October 22, 1996 to incorporate all of the preceding
conditions and add the following condition:
a. The height of the future Retail 1 tenant space at 5680 Cedar Lake Road may be
reduced from 30’8” to not less than 20’0”.
6. The Final PUD shall be amended on January 6, 1997 to incorporate all of the preceding
conditions and add the following condition:
a. The rear door configuration in the tenant space on the south end of the 1650 Park
Place Boulevard building (Bruegger’s Bagels) is revised in accordance with Exhibit
A5.1 - Exterior Elevations dated 12-23-96
7. The Final PUD shall be amended on March 17, 1997 to incorporate all of the preceding
conditions and add the following conditions:
a. The building at 1690 Park Place Boulevard (Arby’s) may utilize neon lighting in
accordance with Exhibits A4.1, A4.2 and A4.3, Arby’s Exterior Elevations provided
said exhibit and assent form are signed by Franchise Associates, Inc.
b. The Landscape Plan may be revised in accordance with Exhibit L.1, Landscape Plan
revised 2/28/97 and stamped received 3/3/97 provided the following conditions are
met.
i) a revised Grading Plan that accurately reflects the proposed retention of
existing berms shall be submitted and approved by the City Engineer and
Zoning Administrator. The Zoning Administrator shall ensure that the plan
meets requirements relating to minimum berm heights adjacent to truck
circulation areas.
ii) Prior to implementing the changes, Ryan Construction Company, Inc. and
the current fee owner of 1625 Zarthan Avenue must sign the Assent form and
revised exhibits.
8. The Final PUD shall be amended on January 5, 1998 to incorporate all of the preceding
conditions and add the following conditions:
a. An Office-Max sign may be installed on the east facade of the building located at
5600 Cedar Lake Road (Office-Max) in the location shown on the Exhibit A3.1
Elevation.
b. Prior to issuance of a sign permit, Ryan Construction Company, Inc. and Office
Max must sign the Assent Form and revised exhibit.
9. The Final PUD shall be amended on April 3, 2000 to incorporate all of the preceding
conditions, find no need for a new EAW, and add the following conditions:
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 16
a. The Costco site (Lots 1 and 8) shall be developed, used and maintained in
accordance with the official exhibits, which shall be amended to address the
following conditions: (Amended on July 15, 2002 by Condition 12.a.)
i) The plans shall be amended as determined necessary by the Director of
Public Works to show dedication of right-of-way near 16th/Zarthan as
anticipated in the original development agreement sketch. Landscape plans
shall be amended as necessary and approved by the Zoning Administrator to
accommodate future improvements to this intersection while preserving
existing berming/screening to the extent feasible.
ii) The plans shall be amended to include proof of parking in excess of
minimum requirements as approved by the Zoning Administrator. If excess
proof of parking is shown, details of the proposed curb cuts and effects on
existing landscaping shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning
Administrator.
iii) Elevation drawings shall be amended to show screen wall heights of 12 feet as
measured from the main service drive elevation unless evidence is approved
by the Zoning Administrator that the proposed heights will adequately screen
service vehicles.
iv) Elevation drawings and sign details shall be amended to comply with
ordinance requirements unless a variance for proposed signage has been
approved.
b. Prior to beginning any site work, the following conditions shall be met:
i) a copy of the required Watershed District permit shall be submitted to the
City.
ii) an erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted and approved by
Public Works.
iii) a letter from the MPCA shall confirm no need for a new ISP based upon the
final traffic study by SRF.
iv) The official exhibits and assent form shall be signed by the applicant, owner,
and City.
c. Costco shall adhere to the restrictions on construction times and routes as included
in the final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza except that additional restrictions may
be imposed as necessary to prevent conflicts with customers during peak restaurant
times.
d. Costco shall adhere to restrictions on temporary signage as included in the Final
PUD approval for Park Place Plaza.
e. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional restrictions, the
following conditions shall be met:
i) The development agreement shall be amended and executed and shall
address, at a minimum, land dedication, design, construction, financial
sureties for on- and off-site improvements, and maintenance.
ii) A revised light distribution plan, landscape irrigation plan, and all building
material samples and colors shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning
Administrator.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 17
f. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the following conditions shall be met:
i) the required traffic improvements at 16th Street and the main access drive,
including installation of a traffic signal paid for by the applicant, shall be
complete and operational; the applicant shall also pay its share of a traffic
signal at 16th and Zarthan, which may be installed at a later date.
ii) the entire PUD site shall be found to be in compliance with the conditions of
final PUD approval, or a Letter of Credit shall be submitted in the amount of
125% of the cost of any outstanding improvements, including but not
limited to completion of improvements near the intersection of Park Place
Boulevard and 16th Street, public transit improvements on 16th Street as
approved by Metro Transit, and all conditions of the final PUD resolution
and executed development agreement.
g. Costco shall adhere to restrictions on delivery and garbage service hours and routes as
included in the final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza except that additional
restrictions on garbage service may be imposed on Costco as necessary to prevent
conflicts with customers during peak restaurant hours.
h. All sidewalks throughout the PUD site shall be maintained in a clear, walkable
condition at all times during which one or more buildings within the PUD are open
to the public.
10. The Final PUD shall be amended on November 6, 2000 to incorporate all of the preceding
conditions and add the following condition:
a. Temporary Certificate of Occupancy may be issued prior to the signal at 16th and the
main access drive being operational provided Costco installs a stop sign at the exit to
16th Street and employs off-duty police officers to direct traffic from the date of
opening until such time as the traffic signal is operational or the City agrees it is no
longer necessary.
11. The final PUD shall be amended on August 20, 2001 to incorporate all of the preceding
conditions and add the following conditions:
a. The Costco fueling facility site (Lot 9) shall be developed, used and maintained in
accordance with the official exhibits which shall be amended to address condition
11.f.iv. Previously approved official exhibits for Lots 1, 2 and 8 shall be amended to
include traffic improvements noted in condition 11.g.
b. Costco shall adhere to the Fire Department’s requirements for the fueling facility
including:
i) An employee must be available on-site while the fueling station is open.
ii) A key-actuated manual reset switch shall be installed inside the attendant
building.
iii) A fire department access key box shall be installed on the exterior of the
attendant building.
iv) Instructions shall be provided in English and Spanish.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 18
v) Spill control equipment and supplies to contain and dispose of a 30-gallon
(150% of customer limit) fuel spill. Include storm drain covers, absorbent
materials, containers and tools. Protective clothing and equipment to be
provided for trained attendants.
vi) Dispensing nozzles shall be UL 842 listed.
vii) One 40-B:C fire extinguisher shall be located outside the attendant building
with a cabinet tamper switch to automatically activate emergency shut-off
controls.
c. Prior to beginning any site work, the following conditions shall be met:
i) A copy of the required Watershed District permit or letter from the
Watershed District indicating no need for a permit shall be submitted to the
City.
ii) An erosion and sediment control plan shall be submitted and approved by
Public Works.
iii) The MPCA shall confirm that an ISP amendment is not necessary.
d. Costco shall adhere to the restrictions on construction times and routes as included
in the final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza except that additional restrictions may
be imposed as necessary to prevent conflicts with customers during peak restaurant
times.
e. Costco shall adhere to restrictions on temporary signage as included in the Final
PUD approval for Park Place Plaza.
f. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional restrictions, the
following conditions shall be met:
i) The development agreement shall be amended and executed and shall
address, at a minimum, design, construction, financial sureties for on-site
improvements, including a letter of credit for 125% of the required internal
traffic improvements, and maintenance.
ii) A dimensional signage plan, landscape irrigation plan, and all building
material samples and colors shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning
Administrator.
iii) All lights shall be completely recessed in the canopy.
iv) Revised site and landscaping plans shall be submitted to and approved by the
Zoning Supervisor showing the curb locations around the gasoline storage
tanks and the reduced landscaping island.
g. Prior to issuance of a permanent Occupancy Permit for the Costco warehouse facility
or temporary Occupancy permit for the fueling facility, the entire PUD site shall be
found to be in compliance with the conditions of final PUD approval, the applicant
shall implement traffic improvements recommended by SRF for the internal Costco
warehouse intersection and eliminate three internal access points to Home Depot as
shown on TD & A Layout 3, and shall change the sign at the 16th Street customer
entrance to direct service vehicles to the 16th Street service drive.
h. Service trucks shall use the service entrance on 16th Street and shall be prohibited
from using Zarthan Avenue between Cedar Lake Road and 16th Street and shall be
limited to servicing the fueling facility between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 19
p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays and as
recommended by the traffic study.
i. Violation of any condition of PUD approval, including these amendments, shall
result in a fine of $750 per day.
12. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 02-38-PUD) on July 15, 2002 to incorporate all
of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions:
a. The Costco warehouse building site (Lot 1) shall be developed, used and maintained
in accordance with the official exhibits, which shall be amended as approved by the
Zoning Administrator to provide an accessible sidewalk and convenient stair
location. (Amends Condition 9.a.).
b. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional conditions, the
following conditions shall be met:
i) the official exhibits and assent form shall be signed by the applicant/owners.
ii) the development agreement shall be amended if necessary, as determined by
the City Attorney.
iii) an additional letter of credit shall be submitted for 125% of the cost of the
site improvements.
iv) building material samples and colors shall be submitted and approved by the
Zoning Administrator.
c. Costco shall adhere to the restrictions on construction times and routes as included
in the final PUD approval for Park Place Plaza except that additional restrictions may
be imposed as necessary to prevent conflicts with customers during peak restaurant
times.
d. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the liquor store addition, the applicant
shall submit an electronic file and print and reproducible copy of the plat and as-
built drawings for the PUD site. In the event that any signal arms are found to be on
private property, appropriate easements shall be recorded against the private
property.
e. Violation of any condition of PUD approval, including these amendments, shall
result in a fine of $750 per day.
13. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 04-70-PUD) on March 7, 2005 to incorporate
all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions:
a. The Home Depot garden center 5,764 square foot addition shall be developed, used
and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits.
b. The following traffic improvements are shown on official exhibits and implemented:
i. The 3-way stop intersection on the main drive aisle at the entrance of Costco
is changed to a 4-way stop intersection. All stop signs at this intersection are
changed to standard sized signs.
ii. A new right-turn lane from the main drive aisle into Costco is constructed,
and a new right turn lane (directing traffic north) is also constructed.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 20
iii. Stop signs at the eastern 4-way stop of the main drive aisle are changed to
standard sized sign for better driver recognition.
c. Landscaping shall be installed according to the submitted landscape plan, with
additional tall grass plantings along the banks of storm pond #1. All materials must
be approved by the City’s Environmental Coordinator.
d. Bike racks in the area must be moved and/or replaced in another location on the
Home Depot site.
e. No outdoor storage is allowed; outdoor merchandise is allowed on sidewalk areas
only, in accordance with the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
f. Home Depot must repair or replace the sidewalk if damage occurs during
construction of the garden center addition.
g. All requirements of the City Engineer must be met.
h. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional conditions, the
following conditions shall be met:
i) The official exhibits and assent form shall be signed by the applicant/owners.
ii) The development agreement shall be amended if necessary, as determined by
the City Attorney.
iii) An additional letter of credit shall be submitted for 125% of the cost of the
site improvements.
14. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 10-01-PUD) on March 15, 2010 to incorporate
all of the preceding conditions and to allow one sign on the west side of the building
(currently occupied by Panera Bread) located on Lot 3, Block 1 with the following
conditions:
a. The sign is limited to channel letters and a back lit logo only.
b. The total sign area on the west wall shall not exceed 96 square feet.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council March 15, 2010
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 21
Sign details on west side of building
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 22
Site Plan
SITE
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 23
Excerpts – Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission Minutes
March 3, 2010
3. Hearings
A. Panera Bread – Major Amendment to Planned Unit Development
Location: 5600 Cedar Lake Road
Applicant: Inland Ryan, LLC and Panera, LLC
Case No.: 10-01-PUD
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The applicant
is proposing to amend the approved PUD to allow a wall sign on the west side of the Panera
Bread building.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the sign facing Cedar Lake Road would be lit 24
hours a day.
Mr. Morrison responded the applicant could answer that question. He added that it could
be allowed under the approval.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the approval could be conditioned that the sign
not be lit after closing in case the light is a nuisance.
Mr. Morrison responded that could be done.
Caryl Scobbie, Development Manager, Panera LLC, St. Louis, Missouri, thanked Mr.
Morrison for his presentation. She said the side signage is being requested to increase
Panera’s visibility on Cedar Lake Road. She said a patio will go on the side of the building
as well and the sign will help that area not feel like the back side of a building. It will also
help draw customers from the Home Depot area. She added that technically all of the
exterior lighting is turned off at closing, no later than 10 p.m.
Commissioner Kramer stated he was in favor of the request. He asked if the franchise was
local.
Ms. Scobbie said the Minneapolis area used to be a franchise market. Panera is based out of
St. Louis, Missouri, and is known as the St. Louis Bread Company. In recent years the
company bought the franchise back, and all of the stores are now company owned.
Commissioner Kramer asked whether Panera has considered any signage on the east side of
the building.
Ms. Scobbie responded they have not considered signage on the east side of the building, but
they are going to have a panel on the monument sign at the entrance.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8b) Page 24
Vice-Chair Morris opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, he
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion recommending approval.
Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion, and the motion recommending approval of the
major amendment to the Planned Unit Development passed on a vote of 4-0.
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 8c
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:
First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Sections of Chapter 8 – Building and Contractor
Licensing and Chapter 12 Environmental and Public Health Codes.
RECOMMNEDED ACTION:
Motion to Adopt First Reading of Ordinance amending several sections in Chapter 8 relating to
Business and Contractor Licensing and Section 12-1 of the Environmental and Public Health Code
and set second reading for April 5, 2010.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council wish to proceed with the amendments to Chapters 8 and 12 City Code as
proposed by staff and city attorney?
BACKGROUND:
Staff and City Council discussed modifications to the ordinance at previous meetings. These
modifications include business licensing of massage therapy establishments, the addition of an
individual massage therapist license requirement, and enhancing the peddlers/solicitors licensing
program. Most of the current code and resulting licensing programs were last revised during the
2002 City Code re-codification.
Other code modifications proposed at this time are to the language used for updating fees, re-
inspection fees for licensed establishments, insurance requirements for licensed commercial
entertainment establishments, changes to the Catering Vehicle category in the Food and Beverage
licensing codes, updating references to the Minnesota Department of Health code and an additional
requirement of installing and maintaining grease traps in food establishments.
It should be noted that all amendments to the city code presented will become effective 15 days after
publication with the exception of the Massage Therapist license. Proposing an effective date of July
1, 2010 allows staff time to provide for public education and to assist massage therapists with the
application process.
The proposed revisions are discussed by section below:
Chapter 8 Business Licenses
Fees Sec.8-33
Issue – The existing language establishing fees does not correctly reflect the current process of
adoption by ordinance for new or updated fees.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 2
Proposal – Change the language to establish fees by ordinance as listed in Appendix A of the Code.
Fees are currently adopted by ordinance and codified into Appendix A at the time of annual review.
Discussion – This amendment is essentially a housekeeping revision to ensure the language correctly
reflects the actions taken when adopting fees associated with licensing.
Multiple Re-inspection Fee for Licensed Businesses Sec. 8-193
Issue – Multiple inspections occur at some licensed establishments that do not correct code
violations in a timely manner, resulting in multiple re-inspections and additional staff time. This
issue was initially discussed with the City Council as part of the 2010 budget development process.
Proposal - Create a new license fee component in Section 8-33. The re-inspection fee is proposed to
help cover the cost of city services that occur when multiple re-inspections of licensed property
become necessary. This is often a result of management being remiss in completing timely
corrections of identified code violations. Performing multiple re-inspections has become an
increasing time consuming problem with some businesses. A total of 1928 business license were
issued in 2009. About 30 – 40 of these establishments have required multiple re-inspections to
obtain compliance. Listed below are the proposed components for multiple re-inspection fees:
a) The service fee would be charged when more than two re-inspections are required to achieve
code compliance following a correction notice from the initial inspection. A business could
have several initial inspections each year if conditions change or inspectors respond to
complaints.
b) A multiple re-inspection fee of $130 is proposed. This amount represents an average of two
hours of staff time spent on scheduling, travel, inspection, report writing, and recordkeeping.
This amount is consistent with our fee-for-service approach to recover the cost of the services
being provided. Multiple re-inspections add to overall program cost and reduce the
efficiency and effectiveness of inspection programs.
c) Fees not paid at the time of inspection would be included with the license renewal. The
annual license provides a vehicle for relatively easy collection of any outstanding fees before
the license is issued for continued business operation.
Discussion - Although raising revenue is a possible result from re-inspection fees, successful
implementation of this provision would hopefully be an incentive for business owner’s to work with
the inspector and make the corrections in a timely manner, thereby avoiding the use of re-inspection
fees. This incentive is potentially more useful as a tool and the first step to encourage compliance
before issuing a citation or formal complaint.
Massage Therapy Establishment License Sec. 8-296 – 8-300.
Issue – The increase of massage therapy establishments and individuals providing massage therapy
services outside of licensed establishments has resulted in complaints about the legality of some
services being offered.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 3
Proposal –Add requirements to the existing business license code. Changes proposed to this section
include:
a) The business owner would receive an annual background check performed by the Police
Department as part of the application process. Currently, a background check is only
completed when the city receives an application for a new establishment. Criteria are
proposed to specify what would be grounds for denial of a license as a result of the
background check. This will require additional staff time and will be evaluated for the effect
on the annual license fee cost when 2011 fees are recommended.
b) The establishment may only allow licensed massage therapists to perform massage within the
establishment. The establishment licensee, if performing massage, would also be required to
be a licensed massage therapist. A reduced fee is proposed in this case since only a single
background check is needed.
c) The proposed revision would eliminate the allowance of a portable sink to be used for hand
washing and necessitate a plumbed hand sink as required by the Minnesota State Plumbing
Code.
Massage Therapist License Sec. 8-300 – 8-305.
Issue – Presently no license is required for an individual providing massage therapy within a licensed
establishment or as a private practice outside an establishment. It is unknown to the public if the
massage therapist is qualified to provide legitimate massage therapy.
Proposal - Creation of a new licensing category for individual massage therapists. Requirements
intended to create a minimum competency level and accountability includes:
a) Each massage therapist must be licensed whether working within a licensed establishment or
providing massage therapy outside of a licensed establishment. Examples are a therapist who
provides therapy appointments at a client’s residence or office.
b) License applicants must have successfully completed a minimum 400 hours of training for
massage therapy from an accredited school and provide verification as part of the application
process. Proof of membership in the American Massage Therapy Association (AMTA) or
National Certification Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork (NCBTMB) would
also qualify since they require higher levels of practitioners for membership.
c) A background check completed by the Police Department will be done every year as part of
the annual license application process. Criteria are proposed that provide grounds for denial
of a license as a result of the background check. This will require additional time and will be
reviewed for the effect on the annual license fee cost for 2011
d) A reduced fee would be charged to owners of a licensed establishment if they are also
obtaining a therapist license to reflect a single background check.
e) An exception would allow students at a massage therapy school, operating within the city, to
perform massage on the public provided they are supervised by a licensed massage therapist
within a licensed establishment.
Discussion for both the Massage Establishment and Therapist License– Two informational
meetings were held December 15 and 17, 2009 inviting currently licensed massage establishment
owners to discuss the proposed changes to the establishment license requirements and the addition
of a massage therapist license. All establishments performing massage therapy, whether as an
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 4
independent operation or associated with a spa, salon or chiropractor office, must receive an annual
business license. Staff in attendance included representatives from Inspections and the Police
Department.
Overall, the owners supported the proposed revisions to the existing establishment license
requirements and application process including the licensing of individual therapists. The discussion
by licensees included an appropriate number of training hours, type of accepted certification,
possibility of reduced license fee for the therapist if they were also the license holder for the massage
therapy establishment, and a tool for enforcement of unlicensed individuals providing body services
that are not massage therapy.
Peddlers and Solicitors Sec.8-571-579.
Issue – During the last few years the City experienced an increased number of complaints from
residents regarding the actions of door to door sales people. The current ordinance is very basic and
does not provide the tools to ensure responsible sales practices are occurring by the appropriate
people.
Proposal - Revisions are extensive and intended to help prevent the problems associated with
peddlers and solicitors within the city during recent years. To help facilitate the background,
licensing, and complaint investigation process, this program is being transferred from the Inspections
Department to the Police Department. Applicants will be required to go to the Police Department
Service Counter for an application and also to receive a license. Proposed requirements include:
a) A background check completed by the Police Department done every year before issuing an
annual license. Proposed in the code are criteria that establish grounds for denial of a license
as a result of the background check. This will require additional time by staff and will be
reviewed for the effect on the license fee amount for 2011.
b) A photo I.D. of the applicant will be created and serve as the license and will be required to
be visibly worn at all times when the peddlers and solicitors are located and working within
the city.
Discussion – Most residents with questions or concerns over peddlers contact the Police
Department after regular business hours. Administration of this program by the Police Department
will help improve response and service. The Police Department has purchased software in which
picture identification badges can be made for all the solicitors who successfully complete the license
application process. The transition of moving the program from the Inspections Department to the
Police Department should be seamless.
One provision of the current ordinance that is being carried forward is the license and fee ($150)
requirement for people who go door to door requesting funds for organizations, including non-profit
and religious. This includes residents going to their neighbors to raise funds for organizations such
as the Cancer Society or American Heart Society. It also includes hired fundraisers for national
environmental groups or other causes. The City Attorney will have possible exception language
prepared for the Council meeting if Council would like to consider an alternative to the current code
requirements.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 5
Once the ordinance amendment is approved a public information process will occur to educate
residents on how to ensure the appropriate sales people are registered and what to do if they
experience problems with peddlers.
Commercial Entertainment Establishment License Sec. 8-214.
Issue –Licensed commercial establishments currently are not required to have general liability
insurance to operate. These types of establishments generally have a high public occupancy with
people of all ages creating situations in which people could sustain injury. The Inspections
Department has received calls from users of these establishments asking for insurance information
assuming this information is a requirement of licensing and that it would be publically available.
Proposal – A minor modification is proposed to the existing licensing provisions. There are only
few establishments currently licensed as Commercial Entertainment Establishments. The following
requirements are proposed to be added to this section:
Licensee shall maintain current general liability insurance policy in the amount of a minimum
of $100,000 for each person, $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate. Evidence of
insurance would be provided with license application.
Discussion - Establishments are inspected to ensure compliance with Building, Fire and Property
Maintenance Codes. Additionally, because of the nature of these operations, staff believes the
business owners should carry general liability insurance in case of public injury and be available to
the public if requested. This provision has been discussed with the owners of these establishments.
They all indicated acceptance with considering this provision, each currently having insurance that
meets or exceeds the proposed limits.
Other cities that license similar establishments and require general liability insurance include
Bloomington and Minnetonka.
Food and Beverage Establishments Sec. 256-258
Issue – Currently a $75 Catering Vehicle Decal is issued to a vehicle used to transport food from a
licensed facility to another location or event. Some food services use vehicles for direct sales to
businesses or group functions. The catering vehicle classification is not accurate and does not align
with state requirements.
Proposal – Change the category from Catering Vehicle Decal to Mobile Food Vehicle and add the
exception that a mobile food vehicle is not required to obtain the license and decal if the vehicle is
operated by a food and beverage establishment licensed by the City or has a State issued commissary
or catering food license.
Discussion – Modifying the category to Mobile Food Vehicle aligns this type of license with the
adopted codes by the State Department of Health.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 6
Chapter 12 Environment and Public Health
Environmental and Public Health Regulations Adopted by Reference Sec 12-1.
Issue -The Minnesota Department of Health has prepared a new delegation agreement for cities and
counties performing environmental health services. In preparation to enter into a new delegation
agreement this year, the City needs to ensure our Code properly adopts the necessary MN Statutes
and Rules for Food, Pools, and Lodging as specified in the agreement.
Another issue from an operational perspective is restaurants that do not properly contain kitchen
grease create a problem for our city sewer mains. This can increase staff time to clean and introduces
the possibility of back-ups due to grease clogging, thereby effecting other properties.
Proposal – To adopt the MN rules as required in preparation of the new delegation agreement and
add requirements for installing and maintaining grease traps for each food establishment that has the
potential for grease to enter building plumbing and city sanitary sewer systems.
These requirements are already utilized during inspections; local adoption will only place them
within our Code as referenced documents. These statues and rules are:
a) Air Quality Environmental Emissions - MN Rules Chapters 7011 and 7023
b) Food Code - MN Statues Chapter 157 and 327 and MN Rules Chapter 4626 for Food,
Beverage, Lodging and Food Manager Certification and the addition of requirements for
grease traps.
c) Public Swimming Pools - MN Statues Section 144.71 through 144.74 and MN Rules
4717.0150 through 4717.3970 for Public Pools.
d) Lodging Establishments – MN Rules – 4625.0100 through 4625.2300.
In addition to updating the code sections, we are proposing to add the State Plumbing Code
requirements for the installation and maintenance of grease traps MN State Plumbing Code Chapter
4715.115 subpart 3.
Discussion –Referencing the MN Statues and Rules for the MN Department of Health Delegation
Agreement is essentially a housekeeping action and does not have any real effect on the code
requirements or operations of businesses in the city.
The proposed requirements for maintaining grease traps will clarify responsibilities of the licensee.
This will help ensure the protection of the city sanitary sewer systems and proper maintenance.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Modifications to our licensing program will have a budget neutral effect. Any increase costs incurred
by the City would be recovered through establishing revised licensing fees.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 7
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments: Ordinance
Prepared by: Ann Boettcher, Inspection Services Manager
Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 8
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO BUSINESS LICENSES,
AMENDING REGULATIONS RELATING TO INSPECTION FEES,
MASSAGE THERAPY, PEDDLERS, SOLICITORS AND TRANSIENT
MERCHANTS, AND FOOD AND BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENTS
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. Section 8-33 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to read by
adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language:
Sec. 8-33. Fees.
Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, all fees for licenses under this chapter,
including investigation fees, shall be fixed and determined by the city council, adopted by
resolution and uniformly enforced set by ordinance of the city council and listed as appendix A
of this Code. Such license fees may, from time to time, be amended by council resolution. New
fees called for by any ordinance subsequently adopted may be adopted by ordinance of the
council at second reading and codified into appendix A at the time of the next annual review by
the council. In the case of contractor, business and animal licenses, license applications received
within the last thirty (30) days of the license term will be issued a license for the following year
in the fee amount set for the following calendar year.
Section 2. Section 8-193 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to read by
adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language:
Sec. 8-193. Re-inspection Fee.
An inspection service fee shall be assessed to the licensee for each additional re-
inspection to verify code compliance after a correction notice has been issued and the violation
has not been corrected within two subsequent inspections. The licensee will be invoiced for any
re-inspection fees. Any and all outstanding fees due must be paid before any change of business
ownership is approved or issuance of any annual license renewal.
Section 3. Section 8-1 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to add the
following definition:
Massage therapist means a person who practices or administers massage therapy.
Section 4. Section 8, Division 3, Subdivision VI of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances
relating to massage therapy licensing is amended to read by adding the underlined language and
deleting the strikethrough language:
Sec. 8-296. Massage Therapy Establishment License required.
No person shall engage in the business of operating operate a therapeutic massage
therapy establishment either exclusively or in connection with any other business enterprise
without first obtaining a therapeutic massage therapy establishment license from the city.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 9
Sec. 8-297. Massage Therapy Establishment Regulations adopted.
(a) Each licensed therapeutic massage therapy establishment in the city shall be
constructed and maintained in compliance with the health, safety and building regulations of the
city, and all state laws, rules and regulations, including but not limited to the following:
(1) Walls, floors and ceilings must be smooth, clean and in good repair. Low nap
carpeting is permitted provided it is kept clean and without wear or tear.
(2) Massage rooms must be equipped with lighting capable of illuminating horizontal
surfaces with a minimum intensity of 50 foot candles to facilitate room cleaning.
(3) Massage rooms must be equipped with mechanical air ventilation or an exhaust
fan.
(4) A hot and cold water hand washing sink or an NSF approved portable hand sink
with soap and hand drying by mechanical or disposable towel is required in the
therapeutic massage area. Use of a public bathroom or janitor’s sink is not
allowed. One sink may serve multiple massage therapy rooms in the same
business area.
(5) Any person performing massage therapy, including the licensee of a massage
therapy establishment, must be licensed as a massage therapist pursuant to Section
8-302.
(b) No customer or patron of a therapeutic massage therapy establishment shall be
allowed to enter the licensed premises after 8:30 p.m. and before 8:00 a.m. daily. No customer or
patron of a therapeutic massage therapy establishment shall be allowed to remain upon the
licensed premises after 9:15 p.m. and before 8:00 a.m. daily. Such restrictions on hours shall not
apply where the massage therapy is provided within a health/sports establishment, and in such
case, the hours for massage therapy must coincide with the health/sports establishment's hours of
operation.
(c) During any hours in which any person is present on the licensed premises of a
therapeutic massage therapy establishment, such therapeutic massage establishment shall be
open to inspection by the city inspectors and police officers. Upon demand by any police officer
the city, all persons engaged in providing services in any a therapeutic massage therapy
establishment licensed premises shall identify themselves, giving their true legal by name and
correct address.
(d) The applicant for a new an annual license will be required to provide a copy of a
current government issued identification and complete a license application addendum and
authorizing authorization of for a background check to be completed by the city.
Sec. 8-298. Massage Therapy Establishment License Application.
(a) Each application shall be made on a form supplied by the city and shall contain
the following information:
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 10
(1) Name of business.
(2) Address of business.
(3) Property owner name, address and phone number.
(4) Applicant name, address and phone number.
(5) Name of manager/proprietor.
(6) Names of licensed massage therapist and city license numbers.
(7) Whether the applicant is an individual, corporation, partnership, or other form of
organization.
(8) If the applicant is an individual:
a. The true name, place and date of birth, address and phone number of the
applicant.
b. Whether the applicant has ever used or has been known by any other name
and, if so, what was such name and information concerning dates and
places where used.
c. The name of the business if it is to be conducted under a designation,
name or style other than the full individual name of the applicant; in such
case, a certified copy of the certificate as required by Minn. Stat. ch. 333
shall be attached to the application.
d. The street address at which the applicant has lived during the preceding
five (5) years.
e. The kind, name and location of every business or occupation the applicant
has been engaged in during the preceding five (5) years.
f. The names and addresses of the applicant’s employers and partners, if any,
for the preceding five (5) years.
g. Whether the applicant has ever been convicted of any crime or violation of
any ordinance other than traffic ordinances. If so, the applicant shall
furnish information as to the time, place and offense for which convictions
were had.
h. The physical description of the applicant.
i. Whether the applicant is licensed in other communities to run similar
businesses, and, if so, where.
j. Whether the applicant has previously been denied a massage license or
had such a license or permit suspended or revoked, along with an
explanation of any such denial, suspension or revocation.
(9) If the applicant is a partnership, in addition to the information required by
subsections (a)(1)-(7) of this section, the following shall be provided:
a. The names, addresses and interest of all partners and all information
concerning each partner that is required of an individual applicant in
subsection (a)(8) of this section.
b. A copy of the partnership agreement, which shall be submitted with the
application. If the partnership is required to file a certificate as to a trade
name under the provisions of Minn. Stat. ch. 333, a certified copy of such
certificate shall also be attached.
(10) If the applicant is a corporation or other organization, in addition to the
information required by subsections (a)(1)-(7) of this section, the following shall
be provided:
a. The name and, if incorporated, the state of incorporation.
b. A copy of the certificate of incorporation, articles of incorporation or
association agreement, and bylaws, which shall be attached to the
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 11
application. If a foreign corporation, a certificate of authority, as
described in Minn. Stat. ch. 303 shall also be attached.
c. A list of all persons who are officers or directors of the corporation or
organization or who control or own an interest in such corporation or
organization.
d. All information required by subsection (a)(8) of this section for any
manager or other individual directly involved in the operation of the
massage therapy establishment.
(b) The applicant and licensee shall have a continuing duty to immediately disclose to
the city any change in the information supplied in the application.
Sec. 8-299. Massage Therapy Establishment Application review and license
issuance.
(a) Complete applications shall be reviewed by the city for verification and
investigation of the facts set forth in the application, including a criminal background
investigation of all individuals required to provide the information in section 8-298(a)(8) and
each massage therapist. The city may order and conduct such additional investigation as deemed
necessary.
(b) The city shall make the determination whether to approve or deny the license.
Any denial shall be communicated to the applicant in writing, specifying the reasons for denial.
The applicant may appeal the denial in accordance with the procedure specified in section 8-36.
(c) Complete applications for issuance of annual licenses shall be submitted to the
city at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the license.
Sec. 8-300. Massage Therapy Establishment License Refusal, suspension and
revocation.
The city may refuse to grant a massage therapy establishment license or license renewal
and may suspend or revoke a license for any reasonable cause including the following:
(a) The application is incomplete.
(b) The applicant is less than 18 years of age.
(c) The applicant or any massage therapist working at the massage therapy
establishment has been convicted of a sexually oriented crime, prostitution, or any
other crime or violation involving moral turpitude within five (5) years of the date
of application.
(d) The applicant falsified information on the application.
(e) The applicant or any massage therapist working at the massage therapy
establishment has a history of violations of laws or ordinances that apply to
health, safety, welfare, or more turpitude.
(f) For other good cause.
Sec. 8-301. Massage Therapist License required.
(a) No person shall engage, or hold himself or herself out as being engaged, in the
practice of massage therapy without first obtaining a license as herein provided.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 12
(b) A massage therapist who provides massage therapy at either a licensed massage
therapy establishment or at any other location in the city must comply with all the provisions of
this section.
(c) Exception. A massage therapist license shall not be required for any student of
massage therapy meeting the definition as set forth herein, provided:
(1) The massage therapy is provided during and as part of a course or clinical
component of the school’s program or course work; and
(2) The massage therapy student is supervised by an instructor while providing
massage therapy services. A notice, which advises the public that the person who
may provide massage therapy services is a student of massage therapy and is not
licensed by the city, shall be posted in the room in which the massage therapy is
provided.
Sec. 8-302. Massage Therapist Regulations adopted.
(a) Commencing on January 1, 2011, only massage therapists having the following
qualifications shall be allowed to perform massage therapy at any location in the city:
(1) a diploma or certificate of graduation from a school approved by the American
Massage Therapist Association or other similar reputable massage association; or
(2) a diploma or certificate of graduation from a school, which is either accredited by
a recognized educational accrediting association or agency or is licensed by the
state or local government agency having jurisdiction over the school; or
(3) a certificate of National Certification for Therapeutic Massage and Body Work by
the National Certification Board of Therapeutic Massage and Body Work, an
affiliate of the American Massage Therapy Association.
(b) The licensee shall comply with applicable ordinances, regulations, and laws of the
city, the state of Minnesota, and the United States.
Sec. 8-303. Massage Therapist License application.
(a) Every application for a massage therapist license shall be made on a form
supplied by the city and shall contain the following information:
(1) The name, place and date of birth, address and phone number of the applicant.
(2) Whether the applicant has ever used or has been known by any other name and, if
so, what was such name and information concerning dates and places where used.
(3) The name of the business if it is to be conducted under a designation, name or
style other than the full individual name of the applicant; in such case, a certified
copy of the certificate as required by Minn. Stat. ch. 333 shall be attached to the
application.
(4) The street address at which the applicant has lived during the preceding five (5)
years.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 13
(5) The kind, name and location of every business or occupation the applicant has
been engaged in during the preceding five (5) years.
(6) The names and addresses of the applicant’s employers and partners, if any, for the
preceding five (5) years.
(7) Whether the applicant has ever been convicted of any felony or other crime or
violation of any ordinance other than petty misdemeanor traffic violations and the
time, place and offense involved in any such convictions.
(8) The physical description of the applicant.
(9) The name of the manager or proprietor or other agent in charge of any business
through which the massage therapy services will be provided or scheduled.
(10) The name of any other municipalities in which the applicant works as a massage
therapist.
(11) Whether the applicant has previously been denied a massage license or had such a
license or permit suspended or revoked, along with an explanation of any such
denial, suspension or revocation.
(b) The applicant will be required to provide a copy of a current government issued
identification and complete a license application addendum authorizing the city to conduct a
criminal background investigation.
(c) The applicant and licensee shall have a continuing duty to immediately disclose to
the city any change in the information supplied in the application.
Sec. 8-304. Massage Therapist Application review and license issuance.
(a) Complete applications shall be reviewed by the city for verification and
investigation of the facts set forth in the application, including a criminal background
investigation of the applicant. The city may order and conduct such additional investigation as
deemed necessary.
(b) The city shall make the determination whether to approve or deny the license.
Any denial shall be communicated to the applicant in writing, specifying the reasons for denial.
The applicant may appeal the denial in accordance with the procedure specified in section 8-36.
(c) Complete applications for issuance of annual licenses shall be submitted to the
city at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the license. The determination regarding
approval or denial of the license renewal shall be communicated to the applicant in writing,
specifying the reasons if the application is denied. The applicant may appeal the denial in
accordance with the procedure specified in section 8-36.
Sec. 8-305. Refusal, suspension and revocation of massage therapist license.
The city may refuse to grant a massage therapist license and may suspend or revoke a
license for any reasonable cause including the following:
(a) the application is incomplete.
(b) the applicant is less than 18 years of age.
(c) the applicant has been convicted of a sexually oriented crime, prostitution, or any
other crime or violation involving moral turpitude within five (5) years of the date
of application.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 14
(e) the applicant falsified information on the application.
(f) the applicant has a history of violations of laws or ordinances that apply to health,
safety, welfare, or moral turpitude.
(g) for other good cause.
Section 5. Section 8-1 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to read by
adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language:
Solicitor means any person who goes from house to house, business to business, or any
kind of place to place movement for the purpose of soliciting or taking or attempting to take
orders for the purchase of any goods, wares, or merchandise, including magazines, books,
periodicals or personal property of any nature whatsoever for delivery in the future, or orders for
the performance of maintenance or repair services in or about the home or place of business,
such as furnace cleaning, roof repair or blacktopping. It also means any person who canvasses,
solicits or calls from house to house for contributions or support for any charitable, religious,
civic, educational, philanthropic, social service, welfare, or eleemosynary organization.
Section 6. Chapter 8, Division 4, Subdivision V of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances
relating to peddlers and solicitors and transient merchants is amended to read by adding the
underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language:
Sec. 8-571. Registration required.
(a) No person shall engage in the business of peddler, solicitor or transient merchant
unless the person has first registered as provided in this section. Registrants shall file with the
city a sworn written statement which shall include the following information:
(1) The name and permanent home address for the past five years of the registrant,
and the current local address of the registrant;
(2) In the case of transient merchants, the place where the business is to be carried on,
a description of the nature of the business and of the goods to be sold;
(3) The name and address of the employer or principal of the registrant, and the name
and address of any supplier of the registrant. Credentials establishing the exact
relationship of the registrant to the employer or principal shall be attached to the
registration;
(4) The period of time within which the registrant intends to conduct the permitted
activities;
(5) The source of supply of any goods or property proposed to be sold, where such
goods or products are located at the time the registration is filed, and the proposed
method of delivery of such goods or property;
(6) A recent photograph of the registrant which shall be approximately two inches by
two inches, showing the head and shoulders of the registrant, in a clear and
distinguishing manner;
(7) Whether the registrant has been convicted of any felony, gross misdemeanor or
misdemeanor for which a jail sentence may be imposed;
(8) The last cities, villages or townships, not to exceed three, where the registrant
carried on business immediately preceding the date of registration, and the
addresses from which such business was conducted in those municipalities;
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 15
(9) Whether the registrant has taken advantage of any state or federal bankruptcy or
insolvency law or proceeding as a bankrupt or debtor within the most recent ten
years;
(b) Every peddler, solicitor or vendor required to submit the information set forth in
subsections (a)(1)--(a)(9) of this section shall promptly submit to the clerk any changes in such
information required by changes in circumstances.
(c) If the applicant is to solicit funds, financial information shall be supplied about the
organization in behalf of which funds are to be solicited, in the form specified by the city clerk.
Sec. 8-571. License required; exemptions.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the business of peddler or solicitor
within the City without first obtaining a license from the city; provided that the following are
exempt from the provisions of this section:
(1) Any person taking orders for goods sold by a political, religious, educational, or
nonprofit organization as part of fundraising activities.
(2) Any person selling or attempting to sell at wholesale any goods, wares, products,
merchandise, or other personal property to a retail seller of the items being sold
by the wholesaler.
(3) Any person who sells or attempts to sell or takes or attempts to take orders for any
product grown, produced, cultivated, or raised on any farm.
(4) Any person who makes initial contacts with other people for the purpose of
establishing or trying to establish a regular customer delivery route for the
delivery of perishable food and dairy products, such as baked goods or milk.
(5) Any person making deliveries of perishable food and dairy products to the
customers on his or her established delivery route.
(6) Any person making deliveries of newspapers, newsletters, or other similar
publications on an established customer delivery route, when attempting to
establish a regular delivery route, or when publications are delivered to the
community at large.
(7) Any person conducting the type of sale commonly known as garage sales,
rummage sales, or estate sales.
(8) Any person participating in an organized multi-person bazaar or flea market.
(9) Any person conducting an auction as a properly licensed auctioneer.
(10) Any officer of the court conducting a court-ordered sale.
(b) Persons whose activities are exempted from the licensing requirement shall comply
with any other applicable statutory or ordinance provision, including Section 8-578.
Sec. 8-572. Exceptions.
The following persons are not required to register as set forth in section 8-571:
(1) A peddler or transient merchant excepted from licensure as a peddler or transient
merchant under M.S.A. ch. 329 shall not be required to register under this
subdivision.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 16
(2) Any person who sells or attempts to sell, or solicits or attempts to solicit, orders
for goods, wares or merchandise, or who canvasses, solicits or calls from house to
house for contributions or support, if such person does so on behalf of a:
a. Charitable, benevolent, philanthropic, patriotic, religious, social service,
welfare, educational or eleemosynary organization, a majority of the membership
of which are residents of the city, and which organization so identified in the
course of canvassing, soliciting or peddling; or
b. Bona fide political organization.
(3) Vendors of milk, groceries, bakery products or other commodities, vendors or soft
water service or laundry and dry cleaning pickup or delivery, or vendors of daily
newspapers who make an uninvited initiatory call upon the occupant of a
residence as a preliminary step to the establishment of such commodities or the
providing of such services to regular customers.
Sec. 8-572. Application.
An application for a license shall be made at least fourteen (14) business days before the
person desires to begin conducting a business operation within the city. Each individual seeking
to conduct business as a peddler or solicitor shall complete an application. Application for a
license shall be made on a form provided by the City, which shall include the following
information:
(1) full legal name;
(2) any and all other names under which the applicant has or does conduct business,
or to which the applicant will officially answer to;
(3) physical description (i.e., hair color, eye color, height, weight, any distinguishing
marks or features, and the like);
(4) permanent address and telephone number;
(5) temporary address and telephone number;
(6) full legal name of any and all business operations owned, managed, or operated
by the applicant;
(7) brief description of the business or activity to be conducted and a general
description of the items to be sold or the services to be provided;
(8) if employed, the name, address and telephone number of the employer; or if
acting as an agent, the name, address and telephone number of the principal who
is being represented, with credentials in written form establishing the relationship
and the authority of the employee or agent to act for the employer or principal, as
the case may be;
(9) address and telephone numbers, including cellular phones and facsimile, of
regular place of business, if any exists;
(10) hours, date(s) and locations in the City which the applicant intends to conduct
business;
(11) a copy of a current government issued identification and complete a license
application addendum authorizing the city to conduct a criminal background
investigation;
(12) license plate number, registration information, vehicle identification number
(VIN) and physical description for any vehicle to be used in conjunction with the
business;
(13) any and all addresses and telephone numbers where the applicant can be reached
while conducting business within the city;
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 17
(14) a statement as to whether or not the applicant has been convicted within the last
five (5) years of any felony, gross misdemeanor or misdemeanor for violating any
state or federal statute or any local ordinance, other than minor traffic offenses;
(15) a list of the three (3) most recent city or county locations where the applicant has
conducted business as a peddler or solicitor;
(16) proof of possession of any license or permit that, under federal, state, or county
law, regulation, or ordinance, is required to have in order to conduct the proposed
business; and
(17) any and all additional information as may be deemed necessary by the Chief of
Police.
(18) The applicant shall have a continuing duty to immediately disclose to the city any
change in the information supplied in the application.
Sec. 8-573. Fees; exemptions.
At the time an application for a permit under this subdivision is filed with the city clerk,
the applicant shall pay a registration fee to cover the cost to the city of processing and registering
the applicant. The nonrefundable registration fee shall be set from time to time by the city and a
schedule of such fee is listed in appendix A to this Code. The following applicants are exempt
from the payment of the nonrefundable registration fee:
(1) Any person selling only literature of any kind in a residential area;
(2) Any person dealing with merchandise of any kind to be delivered to customers in
the state directly from points outside of the state; and
(3) Any person soliciting money, donations or financial assistance of any kind for any
religious or charitable organization, or selling merchandise for a fee on behalf of
such an organization.
Sec. 8-573. Fees.
Except for solicitors, which are specifically exempted from paying any fee under this
chapter, all applications for a license shall be accompanied by the fee set from time to time by
the City and a schedule of such fee is listed in appendix A to this Code.
Sec. 8-574. Issuance of certificate of registration.
(a) Upon compliance with the provisions of this subdivision, the city manager or the city
manager's designee shall issue a certificate of registration to the applicant. The certificate shall
show the following:
(1) Registrant's name;
(2) Registrant's address;
(3) Registrant's photograph;
(4) Kinds of any goods to be sold;
(5) Name and address, including popular names, of the organization for which any
funds are to be solicited;
(6) Expiration date;
(7) An identifying number; and
(8) Signature of the issuing officer.
(b) Each peddler, solicitor or transient merchant must secure a personal registration.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 18
(c) No registration shall be used at any time by any person other than the one to
whom such registration is issued.
(d) The clerk shall keep a record of all registrations under this subdivision in
accordance with city policy.
(e) Each registration under this subdivision shall be valid only through the expiration
date stated on the registration, and no registration may extend beyond December 31 of any year.
(f) No registration under this subdivision shall be issued to peddle, sell or solicit
orders for the sale of furs, eyeglasses, medicines, watches, jewelry, plated ware or silverware.
(g) Each certificate of registration under this subdivision shall prohibit engaging in
the business of solicitor, peddler or transient merchant before 9:00 a.m. and after 8:00 p.m. daily,
except for deliveries to a customer pursuant to a prior order for the goods or services.
(h) All peddlers, solicitors and transient merchants required to register under this
subdivision must carry with them, and produce upon request, their certificate of registration
when engaged in the business of peddler, solicitor and transient merchant, and must wear some
type of picture identification conspicuously showing their name and the permitted organization.
Sec. 8-574. Application review and license issuance.
(a) Upon receipt of the application and payment of any required license fee, City will
determine if the application is complete. An application will be considered complete if all
required information is provided. If the City determines that the application is incomplete, the
City must inform the applicant of the required, necessary information that is missing. If the
application is complete, the City must order any investigation, including criminal background
checks, necessary to verify the information provided with the application. Within fifteen (15)
days of receiving a complete application the City will issue the license unless grounds exist for
denying the license application under Sec. 8-575.
(b) A license granted under this subdivision shall be valid for one year.
(c) No license issued under this subdivision shall be transferred to any other person
other than the person to whom the license was issued.
Sec. 8-575. Termination of registration.
Certificates of registration issued under the provisions of this subdivision may be
terminated by the city manager after notice and hearing in the manner provided for the
revocation of permits, pursuant to this article for any of the following causes:
(1) Fraud, misrepresentation or incorrect statement contained in the registrant's
application.
(2) Fraud or misrepresentation made in the course of carrying on the business of
solicitor, peddler or transient merchant.
(3) Any violation of this subdivision.
(4) Conviction of any crime or misdemeanor.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 19
(5) Conducting the business of peddler, solicitor or transient merchant in an unlawful
manner, or in such a manner as to constitute a breach of peace, or to constitute a
menace to the health, safety or general welfare of the public.
Sec. 8-575. Denial of license
(a) The following shall be grounds for denying a peddler or solicitor license:
(1) The failure of an applicant to truthfully provide any information requested by the
city as part of the application process.
(2) The failure of an applicant to sign the license application.
(3) The failure of an applicant to pay the required fee at the time of application.
(4) A conviction with the past five (5) years of the date of application for any
violation of any federal or state statute or regulation, or of any local ordinance,
which adversely reflects upon the person’s ability to conduct the business for
which the license is being sought in a professional, honest and legal manner. Such
violations shall include, but are not limited to, burglary, theft, larceny, swindling,
fraud, unlawful business practices, and any form of actual or threatened physical
harm against another person.
(5) The revocation with the past five (5) years of any license issued to an applicant
for the purpose of conducting business as a peddler, solicitor, or transient
merchant.
(6) Evidence of a bad business reputation of the applicant, or organization
represented by the applicant, including, but not limited to, the existence of more
than three (3) complaints against an applicant, or organization represented by the
applicant, with the Better Business Bureau, the Office of the Minnesota Attorney
General or other state attorney general, or other similar business or consumer
rights office or agency, within the preceding twelve (12) months, or three (3)
complaints filed with the city against an applicant, or organization represented by
the applicant, within the preceding five (5) years.
(7) Other good cause.
(b) If the City denies the license application, the applicant must be notified in writing
of the decision, the reason for denial and the applicant’s right to appeal the denial by requesting,
within ten (10) days of receiving notice of denial, a hearing before the City Manager. The City
Manager or designee shall hear the appeal within fifteen (15) days of the date of the request for a
hearing. The decision of the City Manager or designee shall be final and binding on all parties
concerned.
Sec. 8-576. Prohibition by placarding.
Any resident of the city who wishes to exclude peddlers or solicitors from premises
occupied by the city resident may place upon or near the usual entrance to such premises a
printed placard or sign bearing the following words: "Peddlers and Solicitors Prohibited," or
similar language. Such placard shall be at least three inches long and three inches wide, and the
printing on such placard shall not be smaller than 48-point type. No peddler, solicitor or transient
merchant shall enter in or upon any premises or attempt to enter in or upon any premises where
such placard or sign is placed and maintained.
Sec. 8-576. Identification badges.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 20
At the same time the license is issued, the Chief of Police or designee shall issue to each
licensee a badge, which shall be worn by the licensee in such a way as to be conspicuous at all
times while the licensee is conducting business in the city. The identification badge shall include
the licensee’s photograph, name, license number, company name, and the license expiration date.
Sec. 8-577. Defacing of placard.
No person, other than the person occupying such premises, shall remove or deface a
placard which is placed as set forth in section 8-576.
Sec. 8-577. License suspension or revocation.
(a) Any license issued under this subdivision may be immediately suspended or revoked
by the City for good cause, including, but not limited to, the following:
(1) Engaging in any activity prohibited by Section 8-578. (2) Violating Section 8-
575 or any other provision of the City Code.
(3) Conducting the licensed activity in such a manner as to create a public nuisance,
constitute breach of peace or endanger the health, safety, or general welfare of the
public.
(4) Other good cause.
(b) Notice of a suspension or revocation shall be provided in writing and delivered to the
licensee in person or by mail to the permanent residential address provided on the license
application and shall set forth specifically the grounds for the Chief of Police or designee’s
decision to suspend or revoke the license and inform the licensee of his or her right to appeal the
decision to the City Manager in writing within fifteen (15) days following the service of the
notice. The license remains suspended or revoked during the appeal process. A hearing shall be
conducted by the City Manager or designee within fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of
the appellant’s written appeal. Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given to the
appellant in the same manner as provided for the service of the revocation notice. The decision
of the City Manager or designee on the appeal shall be final and binding on all parties concerned.
Sec. 8-578. Activities prohibited.
No peddler, solicitor, or canvasser, or transient merchant shall conduct business in any of
the following manners:
(1) Call attention to business or goods by crying out, blowing a horn, ringing a bell,
or making any loud or unusual noise.
(2) Furnish false information, or failing to furnish information as required for
registration under this subdivision.
(3) Sell merchandise which is not of merchantable quality or is not fit for the purpose
for which the seller knows or has reason to know the merchandise is being
purchased.
(4) Obstructing the free flow of traffic, either vehicular or pedestrian, on any street,
sidewalk, alleyway, or other public right-of-way.
(5) Conducting business in a way as to create a threat to the health, safety, or welfare
of any specific individual or the general public.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 21
(6) Conducting business before 9:00 am or after 8:00 pm.
(7) Failing to provide proof of license, registration or identification when requested.
(8) Using the license or registration of another person.
(9) Making false or misleading statements about the products or services being sold,
including untrue statements of endorsement. No peddler or solicitor shall claim to
have the endorsement of the City solely based on the City having issued a license
or registration to that person.
(10) Remaining on the property of another person after being requested to leave.
(11) Otherwise operating the business in any manner that a reasonable person would
find obscene, threatening, intimidating or abusive.
Sec. 8-579. Transferability.
A registration under this subdivision cannot be transferred. Each person required to
register under this subdivision must register separately.
Sec. 8-579. Entry upon premises unlawful.
It shall be unlawful for any person while conducting the business of a peddler or solicitor
to entered upon any premises in the City where the owner, occupant, or person legally in charge
of the premises has posted, at the entry to the premises, or at the entry to the principal building
on the premises, a sign bearing the words “No Peddlers,” “No Solicitors,” or words of similar
import.
Section 7. Section 8, Division 3, Subdivision II of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is
amended to read by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language:
Sec. 8-214. Insurance.
(a) Except as otherwise required in this Code, applicants and licensees shall maintain
comprehensive general liability insurance provided by an insurance carrier authorized to do
business in the state. The amount of such insurance rates shall be set by ordinance by the City
Council and listed in appendix A to this Code. Such insurance shall remain effective for the term
of the license.
(b) The license applicant shall deliver to the city a certificate of insurance, which
provides that the insurance may not be canceled by the insurer, except upon thirty (30) days'
prior written notice to the city. If such insurance is terminated or not renewed with another
policy conforming to the requirements of this section, the license shall be automatically
suspended until the insurance has been replaced and a new certificate of insurance is filed with
the city.
(c) The licensee is responsible to provide the city with a current certificate of
insurance if the policy is renewed during the term of the license
Section 8. Section 8, Division 3, Subdivision IV of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances
relating to Food and Beverage Establishments is amended to read by adding the underlined
language and deleting the strikethrough language:
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 22
Sec. 8-256. License required.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a food or beverage establishment,
mobile food vehicle or food vending machine without obtaining a license from the city.
(b) One license may be issued to a single applicant for multiple food establishments
within a single building or establishment when the owner of all food establishments is the same
or multiple mobile food vehicles.
(c) Each food vending machine must have a valid city-issued license decal affixed in
a visible location.
Sec. 8-257. Classification of food and beverage establishments and food vending
machines.
The city will classify each food and beverage establishment, mobile food vehicle, and
food vending machine based on the use occurring, in accordance with the food code, into one of
the following categories before a license is issued:
(1) Class H plus--Multiple use license permitting three or more uses of any risk class
to operate.
(2) Class H--High risk use license permitting up to two high risk uses or a single high
risk use with a single low or medium risk use.
(3) Class M--Medium risk use license permitting a single medium risk use.
(4) Class L--Low risk use license permitting a single low risk use.
(5) Class V--Food vending machines.
(6) Class S--Seasonal concession with low or medium risk.
(7) Class E--Multi-site educational facilities – Educational facility with multiple
locations within the city.
(8) Catering Vehicle Decal Mobile Food Vehicle - Each vehicle used to transport
food from a licensed food facility must have a valid city issued decal.
Exception – A mobile food vehicle license shall not be required for any mobile
food vehicle operated by a food and beverage establishment licensed by the City
or that has a valid state issued commissary or catering food license
Sec. 8-258. Regulations and standards.
All food and beverage establishments and food vending machines licensed under this
subdivision shall comply with the city's food code as set forth in section 12-1 of this Code.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 23
(a) All food and beverage establishments, mobile food vehicle, and food vending
machines licensed under this subdivision shall comply with the city’s food code as set forth in
section 12-1 of this Code.
Section 9. Chapter 12, Article I of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to read
by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language:
Sec. 12-1. Environmental and public health regulations adopted by reference.
(a) Air quality environmental emissions. The city adopts and incorporates by
reference the air emissions standards adopted by the air quality division of the state pollution
control agency as Minn. Minnesota Rules Chapters 7011 and 7023, as amended. A copy of the
regulations, together with any applicable amendments, shall be marked "St. Louis Park--Official
Copy" and shall be kept on file in the office of the city clerk and open to inspection and use by
the public.
(b) Food code. The city adopts and incorporates by reference the food code adopted
by the state department of health and set forth in Minnesota Statutes Chapters 157 and 327 and
Minn.Minnesota Rules Chapter 4626 for Food, Beverage, Lodging and Food Manager
Certification, as amended. A copy of the regulations, together with any applicable amendments,
shall be marked "St. Louis Park--Official Copy" and shall be kept on file in the office of the city
clerk and open to inspection by the public.
(1) Permit required. A permit is required for installation of food and beverage
equipment regulated within the food code. The applicant shall complete an
application and submit detailed plans and specifications of proposed equipment
for review by the city.
(2) Fees. Permit fees shall be according to the official city fee schedule, set forth in
appendix A, as approved and revised by the city council resolution. Fees must be
paid prior to a permit being issued.
(3) Permit term. Permits will expire if the work is not completed and approved within
180 days of issuance.
(4) Grease traps. Each food establishment with potential for grease to enter building
plumbing and city sanitary sewer systems must install and maintain grease trap(s)
in accordance with Minnesota Plumbing Code
(c) Public swimming pools. The city adopts and incorporates by reference the rules
establishing operation and maintenance, design, installation and construction standards for public
pools and facilities related to them adopted by the state department of health as Minnesota
Statutes Section 1441.1222 and Minn. Minnesota Rules Chapter 4717 4717.0150 to 4717.3970,
as amended. A copy of the regulations, together with any applicable amendments, shall be
marked "St. Louis Park--Official Copy" and shall be kept on file in the office of the city clerk
and open to inspection by the public.
(1) Permit required. A permit is required for installation of swimming pools, hot tubs
and spas. The applicant shall complete an application and submit detailed plans
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8c) Page 24
and specifications of the proposed pool and related equipment for review by the
city.
(2) Fees. Permit fees shall be according to the official city fee schedule, set forth in
appendix A, as approved and revised by city council resolution. Fees must be paid
prior to a permit being issued.
(3) Permit term. Permits will expire if the work is not completed and approved within
180 days of issuance.
(d) Lodging establishments. The city adopts and incorporates by reference the rules
regulating lodging establishments adopted by the state department of health as Minn. Minnesota
Rules 4625.0400--4625.2355 4625.0100 to 4625.2300, as amended. One copy of the regulations
shall be marked "St. Louis Park--Official Copy" and shall be kept on file in the office of the city
clerk and open to inspection by the public.
Section 10. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication, except for the
provisions relating to Massage Therapist Licenses which shall be effective July 1, 2010.
ADOPTED this ______ day of _______________, 2010, by the City Council of the City
of St. Louis Park.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By:
Jeffrey W. Jacobs, Mayor
ATTEST:
Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
Meeting Date: March 15, 2010
Agenda Item #: 8d
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:
Contract Amendment - Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange Project.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to approve Amendment No. 1 to Contract 142-08 which provides additional engineering
consulting services for the Highway 7 / Louisiana Avenue Interchange project, Project No. 2012-
0100.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to pursue Phase 3 project development activities?
BACKGROUND:
History and Recent Activities
The City’s Capital Improvement Program (C.I.P.) indentifies the Hwy 7/Louisiana Avenue
intersection as a priority improvement project. The proposed project will provide for the
construction of a grade-separated interchange at Louisiana Avenue and Hwy 7. The project will also
include pedestrian and bicycle friendly improvements along with re-configuration of the frontage
roads in order to improve access, safety, and traffic flow for both the Hwy 7 corridor and Louisiana
Avenue. This proposed improvement is essential in meeting the transportation and safety needs of
both Mn/DOT and the City.
In December 2008, the City entered into a contract in the amount of $306,548 with SEH, Inc. for
engineering services related to developing plans for a grade separated interchange at Highway 7 and
Louisiana Avenue. SEH developed a work plan that includes four phases. Phase 1 includes scoping
and data collection, Phase 2 includes concept design and alternatives analysis, Phase 3 includes
preliminary design and environmental assessment, and Phase 4 includes final design, right-of-way
acquisition and bidding documents.
The initial contract included all project activities for Phase 1 and 2 which are now nearing
completion. The Project Management Team (PMT) has evaluated 10 concept designs, 7 grade
separated interchange designs and 3 at-grade intersection designs. Based on feedback from the
public and all the involved stakeholders, two concept designs remain under consideration as a
preferred concept; Option 4, Button hook ramps with roundabouts and Option 6, the tight
diamond design.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8d) Page 2
The PMT considers Option 4, the button hook ramp design, as the “preferred concept” from a
roadway design and cost perspective. However, to insure a fully informed decision on the final
concept, Community Development staff recommend that both concepts be developed further to
better determine which concept of the final two is more favorable to area redevelopment needs or
possibilities and what the opportunity costs might be.
Additional Professional Services for Phase 3
Since two viable concept designs remain as finalists for a preferred design, Staff is recommending
that both concepts be carried into Phase 3 of the project development process. Further study of
both options in Phase 3 will answer questions about right-of-way impacts and future development
opportunities that differ between the two options. By completing this work, the consultant will then
be able to quantify the right-of-way impacts and development opportunities to help finalize the
decision on a preferred concept. It is expected that a preferred concept will be decided upon during
Phase 3 and, at that time, remaining Phase 3 work would only be performed on that concept.
Phase 3 work is best described as the preliminary detail design and environmental assessment
(study/documentation) phase of the project. The following is a list of tasks associated with this
phase of the project:
• An environmental assessment
• Geometric layout development
• A determination of right of way needs
• Traffic Studies and Modeling
• Public involvement activities
• Project management activities
Project Schedule
Phase 2 activities are expected to conclude upon completion of public outreach meetings with
adjacent property owners and Methodist Hospital, anticipated in mid-March, 2010.
Phase 3 activities are tentatively scheduled to begin in April, 2010 and are expected to be completed
by May, 2011. Assuming adequate funding becomes available, this schedule provides for Phase 4
activities (Final Design and Plans) with a bid opening in December, 2011; construction would occur
from 2012 to 2013. Completing the Phase 3 work will better position this project if federal funding
opportunities should become available.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Estimated Contract Cost
SEH estimates the cost to carry one concept through Phase 3 activities at $300,000 and an
additional $50,000 to carry the second concept completely through Phase 3 activities at the same
time. All work performed under this contract is being paid for on a time and materials basis. The
initial source of funding for this work/project is the HRA levy proceeds.
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8d) Page 3
Based on carrying both concepts through Phase 3 activities, professional services cost for Contract
142-08 with SEH is now estimated as follows:
Original Contract (Phase 1 & 2 work) $ 306,548
Amendment No. 1 (Phase 3 work) $ 350,000
Total $ 656,548
Contract Terms
The following terms are incorporated into this contract:
1. Phase 3 contract work is scheduled for completion by the end of June, 2011.
2. Compensation is based on actual work performed with a maximum contract amount of
$656,548.
3. SEH has independent contractor status.
4. City may terminate this contract with seven (7) days notice.
The document utilized for this contract is the City’s standard professional services agreement
developed by the City Attorney.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The following Strategic Direction and focus area has been identified by Council.
St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community.
Focus will be on:
• Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources
affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and SWLRT.
Attachments: Amendment No. 1
Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Scott Brink, City Engineer
Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of March 15, 2010 (Item No. 8d) Page 4
AMENDMENT NO 1.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACT NO. 142-08
THIS AGREEMENT is made on March 15, 2010, by and between the CITY OF ST.
LOUIS PARK, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as “City”),
and Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (hereinafter referred to as “SEH”).
1. BACKGROUND: The parties have previously entered into an agreement for consulting
services dated December 1, 2008 (“Initial Agreement”). The Initial Agreement authorizes
SEH to provide engineering consulting services for Phase 1 and 2 of project 2012-0100 at a
cost not to exceed $306,548.00.
2. ITEM NO. 1: SCOPE OF SERVICES: This paragraph shall be amended to include the
additional Phase 3 engineering services outlined in the SEH proposal dated March 9, 2010.
3. ITEM NO. 2: TIME FOR PERFORMANCE OF SERVICES: This paragraph is
modified to reflect that Phase 3 activities are to be completed by the end of May, 2011.
4. ITEM NO. 3: COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES: Subject to the modifications set
forth herein, the not to exceed compensation amount shall increase by $350,000 from
$306,548.00 to $656,548.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed by their respective duly authorized officers.
EXECUTED as to the day and year first above written.
SEH, INC. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By:________________________________ By:________________________________
Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Title:_______________________________ and________________________________
Thomas Harmening, City Manager