HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/05/10 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
MAY 10, 2010
Box lunches available starting at 5:45 p.m.
6:00 p.m. LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION - Council Chambers
7:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers
Discussion Items
1. 7:00 p.m. Hoigaard Village Project and Redevelopment Contract Update – EDA
Discussion
2. 7:45 p.m. Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco
Development (Wooddale Pointe project) – EDA Discussion
3. 8:15 p.m. Cedar Knoll Dog Park
4. 8:45 p.m. Council Policy Discussion -Environmental Stewardship - Councilmembers
Sanger and Mavity
5. 9:15 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – May 17 and May 24
6. 9:30 p.m. Communications (Verbal)
Written Reports
7. Potential EDA acquisition of 7015 Walker Street (former Reynolds Welding Supply
Building)
8. Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bonds Refinancing for Phase I and Debt
Issuance for Phase II
9. Proposed Housekeeping Amendments regarding Staff Positions and Municipal Elections
10. City Council Bike Ride
11. Fire Stations Project Update
12. Reilly Site – Update on the Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study
9:35 p.m. Adjourn
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.
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.
2010 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Reconvene – May 10, 2010
City Council Chambers
6:00 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Reconvene the St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
2. Roll Call – Declaration of Quorum
3. Acknowledgement of Trained Members
4. Review of Properties in Appeal
a. Board Action Where Petitioner Has Denied Access or Withdrawn
b. Board Action Where Petitioner & Assessor Are in Agreement
c. Board Action Where Petitioner & Assessor are Not in Agreement
6. Instruct Assessor to Complete Record of Changes for Submittal
7. Complete the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Certification Form
8. Adjourn
Reconvene Meeting of 10 May 2010 Page 2
Subject: 2010 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
2010 St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
All property owners are entitled to the right of appeal regarding their classification and market value.
The City is required by statute to conduct a Local Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting to hear
appeals, an open book meeting or transfer the Board to the County. The focus of the board is on:
the property classification which is determined by the property’s use; and, the market value which
is based on a) the characteristics of the real estate and b) market conditions as of the date of the
assessment (January 2, 2010). Minnesota statute requires that all properties are to be valued at full
market value.
Focal Points for the Board. Agenda as Indicated on Cover Sheet, decisions on:
1. Board Action affirming No Change in Value – for cases where the petitioner has withdrawn
or denied access.
2. Board Action affirming agreed upon Valuation Change – for cases where the owner and
assessing staff have reached mutual agreement.
3. Board Action deciding the classification and/or valuation of properties where agreement
between the owner and assessing staff has not been reached.
BACKGROUND:
The Board convened on April 26, 2010 at which time a total of twelve (12) parcels were recognized
to be under appeal. The Board set the process and chose to reconvene May 10, 2010 at which time
the merit of each appeal will be decided.
A few housekeeping observations are made for the reference of the board. One trained and certified
Board member (either Paul Omodt or Sue Santa) must be present at each meeting. It is essential
that the Board rules on each question before it and likewise that the Board recognizes that it can
reduce, sustain or increase valuations as deemed necessary. The time window for the board to
conclude business is 20 days after convening (deadline is May 15, 2010). Prior to adjourning the
board should instruct the assessor to submit a record of their actions on the Department of Revenue
required form (item 6 on agenda). Finally, a Local Board of Appeal Certification Form must be
signed at each Board meeting by all Board members present.
The Local Board process depends on active participation from all parties involved including the
board members, the property owner and assessing staff. All property owners are requested to
complete a form stating their basis of appeal, their estimate of the market value and informed that
they may present information supporting their opinion of value and/or classification. The assessing
staff in turn re-inspects the properties in order to verify the physical characteristics forming our
analysis basis and to re-appraise the properties. Staff also engages the owner in discussion to review
the appeal question(s) and to reach agreement where possible before the board reconvenes.
The assessing staff does not define the market. Our function is to reflect the market for each parcel
within our community. There are variations from neighborhood to neighborhood and for properties
within each neighborhood. These differentials are assessed for each property to reflect the
competitive market for differences in location, age, style, finish, updating, etc. depending on the
information available. When requested, we have re-inspected properties to review the accuracy of
our data. Adjustments have been made where necessary and the appeal process has been explained.
Reconvene Meeting of 10 May 2010 Page 3
Subject: 2010 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Status report for the twelve (12) appeals of record (as of Wednesday May 5th):
Two (2) appeals have been withdrawn. One (1) property owner has not allowed inspection.
The right of withdrawal or to deny access is at the owner’s discretion and no further response has
been taken. It is requested that the Board take action affirming no change to the assessed market
value and classification for these properties as of January 2, 2010.
Two (2) appeals have been reviewed with the result that assessing staff and the petitioner have
reached a mutually acceptable valuation. For this group of appeals, it is requested that the Board
take action affirming the resolved valuation (no classification change).
Two (2) appeals have been reviewed but have not been resolved to a mutual agreement between the
property owner and assessing staff. It is requested that the Board hear and decide the merits of each
case. We have indicated to each petitioner that the Board will generally allow 5-10 minutes for their
presentation followed by a 3-5 minute presentation by the assessing staff. The Board may adjust
these time allowances as needed.
Five (5) properties are scheduled for inspection on Wednesday (5th) or Thursday (6th). These
appeals remain unresolved at this time due to owner requested delay in scheduling. The assessing
staff will be completing the revaluation analyses by noon Friday and engaging in discussion with the
property owner to reach a mutually acceptable resolution. In the event that the appeals cannot be
resolved, some or all properties in this group will need the Board to hear and decide the merits of
each case.
NOTE: To allow for staff to meet with properties listed above, the assessing
staff report with final details on the properties will be delivered to the Board
later Friday afternoon (5/7/10).
Prepared by: Cory Bultema, City Assessor
Reveiwed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 1
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Hoigaard Village Project and Redevelopment Contract Update.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
The purpose of this agenda item is to provide the EDA with an update on the Hoigaard Village
project and an opportunity to ask specific questions of the Redeveloper, Mr. Frank Dunbar, relative
to the project and its refinancing.
BACKGROUND:
At a special EDA meeting on April 26, 2010 the existing taxable Tax Increment Finance (TIF) notes
for the Hoigaard Village project were extended 60 days to facilitate the Redeveloper’s efforts to
refinance the project. These short-term notes were issued in 2006 and 2007 to be in place until
construction was completed on components of the project. Now that over three quarters of the
project has been completed the Redeveloper is now ready to put long-term TIF notes in place. The
purpose of this agenda item is to give the EDA an opportunity to discuss the project’s status and ask
questions prior to issuance of the long-term TIF notes at the upcoming May 17th meeting. Since the
original TIF notes were issued economic conditions have changed dramatically especially within the
condominium market. This has slowed completion of Hoigaard Village and lead to rental of the
Harmony Vista units rather than sales. The EDA’s consultants and the Redeveloper will be in
attendance to answer questions. The EDA’s Amended Redevelopment Contract with Union Land II
LLC requires the Redeveloper to report to the EDA each year regarding the status of its Hoigaard
Village project. In compliance with this obligation the Redeveloper will provide a project update at
the study session.
Project Recap
In 2006 Union Land II LLC led by Dunbar Development (Redeveloper) acquired 6 parcels
(generally at the northwest corner of 36th Street and Highway 100); most notably the former
Hoigaards sporting goods store site. When combined these parcels created a 9.6-acre redevelopment
site. The Redeveloper removed the former structures, remediated the contaminated soils on the site
and installed new utility and street improvements. In their place, the Redeveloper planned to
construct a two-phase, four-stage, mixed use redevelopment called “Hoigaard Village”.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Subject: Hoigaard Village Project Update
Phase I was to have two stages and was to be constructed along the north side of 36th Street between
Xenwood and Webster Avenues. Stage 1 was to consist of a five story, vertical mixed use building
(“Harmony Vista”) that faced 36th Street. The building was to have approximately 25,000 square
feet of commercial space on the ground floor and a total of 74 condominium units on the upper four
floors.
Current Status: Harmony Vista was completed in 2008. The retail portion was sold to another
private group who has leased approximately 45% of the space. The group is currently in discussion
with several other retail uses. As for the housing units, the recent recession resulted in a severe
market decline in condominium sales. Therefore in order to keep the building from being dark the
Redeveloper was allowed to lease the units until such time the market recovers. Currently the
building is over 90% leased.
Stage 2, to be built on the same block as Harmony Vista but directly behind along 35th Street, was
to consist of a 58 unit condominium building called “The Adagio” with below ground parking.
Current Status: The Adagio site is cleared and ready for development (“pad-ready”) but
construction has not commenced due to adverse market conditions. Last year, the Redeveloper
received interest from Volunteers of America to build an independent senior facility on this site
however that interest has subsequently stalled.
Phase II was also to have two stages, and was to be constructed on the north half of the site. Stage 3,
built along the north side of 35th Street between Xenwood and Webster Avenues, was to include 22
rowhouses called “Medley Row” with below ground parking.
Current Status: The Medley Row site is “pad-ready” but construction has not commenced due to
adverse market conditions.
Stage 4, at the far north end of the redevelopment site, was to include a 220-unit, luxury apartment
building called “The Camerata”.
Current Status: The Camerata was completed in 2007 and the building is over 90% leased.
Project Overview: As envisioned, Hoigaard Village was to have a total of 374 housing units (132
condominium units, 22 townhouse units, and 220 apartment units) and 25,000 square feet of
commercial space. In addition, a central green and a regional stormwater pond were to be
incorporated into the project site to serve the northern portion of the Elmwood neighborhood.
Overall Project Status: To date, all the required property acquisitions, building demolitions, and
various public improvements have been completed. 78% of the housing units have been constructed
along with the regional pond and a central green which includes outdoor art.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Subject: Hoigaard Village Project Update
Redevelopment Contract Recap
On March 6, 2006 the EDA entered into a Redevelopment Contract with Union Land II to
facilitate the Hoigaard Village project. Within that Contract the EDA agreed to provide up to $5
million in Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance to reimburse the Redeveloper for certain “Public
Redevelopment Costs” incurred in connection with the redevelopment of the site. These included:
• Building demolition
• Soil remediation
• Site preparation
• Stormwater pond construction (75% of the total cost)
• Utility upgrades
• Curb, gutter, sidewalks
• Landscaping
• Lighting
On July 10, 2006, a First Amendment to the Redevelopment Contract with Union Land II LLC
was approved which made five clarifications to the original Contract.
On March 5, 2007, a Second Amendment was approved which revised the commencement and
completion dates for three of the project’s four Stages. However, due to a more aggressive
construction schedule, the final completion date for the entire project was moved forward four
months from December 31, 2008 to August 30, 2008.
On April 28, 2008, a Third Amendment was approved which revised the commencement dates and
completion for three of the project’s four Stages and provided the Redeveloper with an additional
$200,000 in tax increment financing to partially offset greater than anticipated environmental
remediation costs.
On August 17, 2009, a Fourth Amendment was approved which revised the commencement and
completion dates for Phase 1 Stage 2 (the 58 unit condominium building called “The Adagio”) and
Phase II Stage 3 (the 22 rowhomes called “Medley Row”) due to adverse economic conditions
within the housing market. Thus, the required commencement dates for both stages were extended
to October 1, 2010 and their required completion dates were likewise extended to Dec 31, 2011.
Pursuant to the Contract, the EDA issued and sold its $1,663,000 Taxable TIF Note, Series 2006A
for the Phase I portion of the project (Harmony Vista) and its $2,540,000 Taxable TIF Note, Series
2007A for the Phase II portion of the project (Camerata Apartments). The notes were issued with a
taxable interest rate of 7.25%, had maturity dates of February 1, 2010 and February 1, 2011
respectively and were secured by the pledge of 95% of the tax increment generated from all parcels
located within the project area as defined in the Contract (whether developed upon or not). On
February 1 and again on April 26, 2010 the EDA approved extensions related to the maturity date of
the Series 2006A Taxable TIF Note, so as to aid the Redeveloper’s efforts to refinance the project.
Such extensions did not alter the Redeveloper’s obligations under the Contract and all other terms of
the previously approved TIF Note remained the same.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Subject: Hoigaard Village Project Update
Pursuant to Section 7.4 of the Redevelopment Contract, the Redeveloper has approached the EDA
to complete the tax exempt refinancing of the two existing taxable TIF notes.
Issues to Consider
1. What has changed relative to the project since the EDA originally issued the taxable
TIF revenue notes?
Changes that are proposed or that have occurred to the project outlined in the following
chart:
The changes in value (Harmony Vista Condos and Camerata Apartments) are due to the
overall downturn in the real estate market and the overall taxes paid are affected by the
downturn in the condominium market and inability to sell units. The proposed changes in
use (Adagio Condos to Apartments) are likewise a response due the downturn in the
condominium market and inability to sell units.
V alue Per
Unit or
Assessed Proposal Development # of Units
or Sq/Ft Valuation
Taxes to be
Paid
Retail 25,000 125$ 3,125,000$ 103,267$
Harmony Vista Condos 74 287,552$ 21,278,848$ 267,934$
Camerata Apartments 220 115,000$ 25,300,000$ 378,453$
Medley Row Town Homes 22 394,155$ 8,671,410$ 109,187$
Adagio Condos 58 304,590$ 17,666,220$ 222,709$
TOTAL N/A N/A 76,041,478$ 1,081,549$
Retail 25,000 150$ 3,759,700$ 125,418$
Harmony Vista Condos 74 145,175$ 10,742,940$ 136,710$
Camerata Apartments 220 108,000$ 23,760,000$ 368,709$
Medley Row Town Homes 22 380,000$ 8,360,000$ 104,062$
Adagio Apartments 98 115,000$ 11,270,000$ 170,662$
TOTAL N/A N/A 57,892,640$ 905,562$
Difference (18,148,838)$ (175,988)$
Original
Actual
2. Why can’t the Redeveloper continue with the current financing structure?
The current structure of the taxable TIF revenue notes now have maturity dates of July 1,
2010 and February 1, 2011 respectively and therefore need to be paid in full via a
refinancing. It was anticipated when these revenue notes were issued in 2006 and 2007 that
the EDA would do tax exempt “take out” financing as outlined in the Redevelopment
Contract. The reason for the EDA agreeing to tax exempt financing is that it reduces the
interest cost associated with the financing (7.25% vs. the proposed 5% rate). Also, under
the taxable financing, the Redeveloper has personal guarantees for payments on the notes,
which will go away when they are refinanced as tax exempt.
3. Why does it make sense for the EDA to agree to do the tax exempt take out financing?
Tax exempt take out financing reduces interest costs to the project which means a greater
likelihood that there will be sufficient TIF to repay the debt and payoff the obligation
sooner. If the obligation is paid off sooner, the EDA can have the choice to use any future
increment generated from the project to complete other redevelopment projects in the city
(within pooling restrictions) or chose to decertify the district early.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Subject: Hoigaard Village Project Update
It should be noted that the tax exempt financing contemplated here will require 95 percent
of the increment generated to pay off the obligation and that the entire term of the original
district will be required (payment through February 1, 2023). The extended term of the
district (7 years) that was approved through special legislation in 2009 is not pledged or
available to pay debt service on this revenue note.
4. What are the terms of the take out financing and who is holding/purchasing the note?
a. The amount of the tax exempt revenue note is approximately $4.3 million
b. Interest rate is 5%
c. Payments are due on August 1 and February 1 in the years 2010 through February 1
2023
d. There is no coverage on the note (since it is structured more like a Pay-As-You-Go
TIF note, rather than a bond)
e. There is a single investor that is purchasing the note, just like a Pay-As-You-Go TIF
note. The investor is a partner in the development and has dollars to invest to at a
lower rate of return to assure the project performs well enough to repay the debt
obligation. In return for agreeing to a lower financing rate, the investor will receive
the benefits of the tax exempt status of the note.
f. Values for pay 2010 are based upon the Minimum Assessment Agreement in place as
of January 2, 2009
g. Values for pay 2011 are based upon values discussed with the Assessor and reflect
current market values for the developments that are constructed
h. There is no inflation on value in years pay 2012 through pay 2013; and
i. Starting with pay 2014 there is a .65% inflation built into the revenue generated
5. Does the EDA have the option of not approving the request?
The Redeveloper is required to meet certain parameters under the Redevelopment Contract
for the EDA to consider issuing take out financing. These conditions include:
a. Redeveloper has secured a buyer(s) for the note(s)
b. City Assessor “signing” off on the valuations proposed for sizing of the note(s)
c. EDA approval of coverage on the note(s), subject to adjustment if market conditions
permit less and the EDA approves
d. EDA approval of underwriter and all underwriting terms and assumptions, provided
that the EDA’s consent will not be unreasonably withheld
e. Redeveloper has closed on its financing for Phase II of the Minimum Improvements
(Camerata Apartments)
The Redeveloper has met items (a) and (e) above and staff and consultants met with the City
Assessor to assure compliance with (b). Staff and consultants are of the opinion that the
underwriting criteria outlined in question #4 complies with items (c) and (d) above. It
should be noted that typically on TIF revenue bonds the underwriters would require some
coverage (110% to 125%). Since this is a revenue note, is structured more like a Pay-As-
You-Go TIF note, and there is a single purchaser that is an investor in the developments, we
are of the opinion that coverage is not necessary.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 1) Page 6
Subject: Hoigaard Village Project Update
As stated in the Contract, the EDA’s consent to the refinancing cannot be unreasonably
withheld, if the Redeveloper has met the above conditions. The terms of the refinancing are
reasonable due to market conditions.
6. What parcels comprise the TIF that is being pledged to the note?
There are 254 parcels that are pledged to the repayment of the note. They are comprised of
the 249 parcels for Harmony Vista Condominiums (units, parking and storage lockers), 1
parcel for the retail development (1st floor of HAmoney Vista and triangle parking lot), 2
parcels for the Camerata Apartments (building and stormwater pond), 1 parcel for the vacant
land which the future Adagio Condos/Apartments will be constructed upon and 1 vacant
parcel where the future Medley Row town homes will be constructed.
7. What happens when the undeveloped parcels are developed?
Pursuant to the Redevelopment Contract, the Redeveloper has the ability to obtain up to
$5.2 million in TIF from the project to offset qualified redevelopment costs. To date, with
the two existing notes, the Redeveloper has utilized approximately $4.3 of this amount. The
Redeveloper has the ability to request the EDA to issue an additional note(s) up to
approximately $900,000, if the tax increment stream will support this amount. Any future
TIF note(s) would be “sized” based upon number of units constructed on the two vacant
parcels, the development timeframe and anticipated increment to be generated. In addition,
these notes may only be able to be issued on a taxable basis due to timing of the initial
expenditures (not eligible for tax exempt take out financing).
8. Will this refinancing require the EDA to incur any costs?
No. The issuance of the tax exempt TIF revenue note will not require any cash payments
from the City or EDA. All costs associated with the issuance (Kennedy & Graven, Ehlers
and Dougherty) are paid from gross proceeds of the tax increment.
Next Steps:
The tax exempt TIF Notes will be prepared for EDA/City Council action at the May 17th meeting.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Nancy Gohman ,EDA Deputy Executive Director and Deputy City Manager
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 2
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development (Wooddale Pointe
project).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff would like to discuss and receive feedback from the EDA on the updated business terms that
would be the basis for a new Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development related to its
proposed Wooddale Pointe project. If it is the consensus of the EDA that the updated business
terms outlined in the attached Summary are acceptable, the EDA will be asked to consider approval
of an updated Redevelopment Contract at its June 7th meeting.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the EDA support the updated business terms proposed for inclusion within a new
Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development to facilitate the Wooddale Pointe project?
BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Greco Development has an option agreement with The Rottlund Company to purchase the two
vacant parcels (3601 Wooddale Avenue and 5810 37th Street West) at the southeast corner of 36th
Street and Wooddale Avenue. This 2-acre redevelopment site is located directly across the street
from the future Southwest Light Rail Transit (LRT) station. Upon purchase Greco is proposing to
clean up the property and construct a five story, mixed use, senior residential housing complex. The
building would include 115 senior rental units on the second through fifth floors (see proposed
building rendering at the end of this document).
SITE
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
Wooddale Pointe would be an “age in place” facility, in which seniors would receive various levels of
care as their health needs dictated. Health care services would range from medication monitoring to
complete memory care. The advantage of this type of facility is that it allows couples and/or friends
to remain together in the same building, even though their individual health care needs may be
different. The facility will be managed by Ebenezer Management Services; a part of Fairview Health
Services. Ebenezer Management Services manages a broad portfolio of senior properties in the Twin
Cities and greater Minnesota. Managed properties include: senior condominiums and cooperatives;
market-rate senior rentals; adult day centers; independent living, assisted living and memory care;
skilled nursing facilities and quality affordable senior housing.
The first floor of the project would be a combination of 10,000 SF of commercial space, and 6,000
SF of common area for the residents, guests, and neighborhood. The Redeveloper has a Letter of
Intent (LOI) with a potential tenant that would lease 80% of the space. Also proposed on the
redevelopment site is a public gathering area at the very corner of the 36th Street/Wooddale Avenue
intersection. This corner plaza area or “pocket park” would feature benches, landscaping planters,
and public art. Proposed parking for the project would include 69 underground stalls, 62 off-street
parking stalls, and 16 on-street parking stalls for employees, guests, and commercial customers. Bike
racks will also be integrated into the site furnishings and the building so as to make it easier for
employees, retail customers, and visitors to arrive by bicycle.
The Redeveloper also plans to seek LEED certification for the project.
Construction on the proposed project is expected to commence by September 1, 2010 and be
completed by February 1, 2012.
Representatives of Greco Development, the Elmwood neighborhood and the City/EDA have worked
collaboratively to develop a master plan for the subject redevelopment area that features:
¾ An attractive building with upscale image
¾ Urban design with distinctive architecture and human scale
¾ Mixed use –residential & neighborhood commercial
¾ Pedestrian friendly & transit accommodating design
¾ Functional and attractive gathering space that includes public art
¾ Surface and underground parking
Greco’s proposed project incorporates many principles of Livable Communities, Transit Oriented
Development and sustainable design. Upon completion, Wooddale Pointe is expected to present a
highly attractive, quality image at one of the city’s key intersections and future LRT stops.
Property Value
The subject site (consisting of two parcels) currently has a total market value of approximately $1.6
million. The market value of the site upon redevelopment is estimated at approximately $13.65
million. The property taxes payable in 2010 on these same properties are $45,439. Upon
redevelopment, the site would generate an estimated $228,157 in property taxes.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
Job Creation
Greco estimates that approximately 85 total jobs will be created between the commercial and
residential portions of the project.
Redevelopment Contract Update
On April 20, 2009 the EDA approved a Contract for Private Redevelopment with Wooddale
Catered Living LLC (Greco Development) related to the proposed Wooddale Pointe project. Since
that time Greco has been seeking project financing with Oak Grove Capital and HUD. Such
approvals have taken substantially longer to obtain than previously anticipated but Greco now
estimates it should receive final HUD approval by the end of June with closing to occur in August.
Since project financing was uncertain, Greco did not execute the previous Redevelopment Contract
and a few things have changed in the interim that now require modification in the Contract. The
most notable change is the requested amount of financial assistance. The Redevelopment Contract
authorized up to $650,000 in tax increment assistance to the Redeveloper to offset some of the
Public Redevelopment Costs associated with the proposed project site. The EDA additionally
authorized the submittal of an application for a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) grant from
Hennepin County to fund certain TOD related public improvements related to the subject
property. The Redevelopment Contract stipulated that if such a grant was approved the maximum
principal amount of the TIF Note would be decreased by the amount of the grant to reflect the
benefit of the grant to the Redeveloper. The EDA was subsequently awarded a grant of $355,000, of
which the EDA would retain $15,000 for administrative costs. Therefore the amount of TIF to be
provided to the Redeveloper would have been reduced to $310,000 under the terms of the previous
Contract. The goal was to save as much increment from the Wooddale Pointe project for other
purposes within the Elmwood Village TIF District; most notably the Hwy 7/Wooddale interchange.
Redeveloper’s Revised TIF Request
Since the Redevelopment Contract was approved, Greco secured a tenant for the first floor
commercial space and bid the project out. Unfortunately construction and financing costs (including
tenant improvements) came in about $430,000 higher than previously estimated. In addition, Oak
Grove Capital and HUD increased their equity requirements to secure financing which meant Greco
had to increase its investment in the project by $2.4 million. These resulted in a larger financial gap
in Greco’s project proforma. Greco has therefore requested that the EDA help fill a portion of the
gap and a proposed $180,000 in additional TIF was negotiated. This would bring the total amount
of TIF in the project to $490,000.
When the EDA approved the Redevelopment Contract last year, it was anticipated that if the entire
$650,000 in TIF was needed it would take approximately seven (7) years to pay the obligation. If
that amount was reduced to $310,000 based upon receipt of the grant, it would take approximately
3 ½ years to pay the obligation. Based upon the updated request of a total of $490,000 in TIF, it is
now estimated that it will take approximately five (5) years to pay the obligation.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
Ehlers & Associates, reviewed Greco Development’s revised project proforma in order to determine
whether the increased level of TIF assistance was warranted. Ehlers analyzed the latest proforma in
comparison with general industry standards for land price, construction costs, lease rates, return on
equity/profit, various fees, etc. Ehlers confirmed that Greco’s updated cost and revenue assumptions
are reasonable and appropriate. In addition, the projected market values per square foot in the
project have been reviewed by the City’s Assessor who concurs they are still within appropriate
market ranges.
Through its analysis, Ehlers verified the financial gap in the Redeveloper’s project proforma has
increased and that the project is not feasible without $490,000 in TIF assistance. Such assistance
would reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of the costs associated with contamination
remediation, site preparation, and underground structured parking. Ehlers concluded that Greco’s
revised tax increment request was considered reasonable given the complexity, quality, projected
total value, and other residual economic benefits derived from the proposed redevelopment. The
EDA’s participation would leverage approximately $13.6 million in new market value. The
requested amount of financial assistance, as a percentage of total project value, is less than 4%. This
is consistent with the level of assistance provided by the EDA to other redevelopment projects.
The proposed TIF Note would be “pay-as-you-go” which is the desired financing method under the
EDA's TIF Policy. Fiscal Disparities would be taken from inside the district which is likewise
consistent with the EDA’s TIF Policy. The Note would be issued in the maximum aggregate principal
amount of $490,000 upon satisfactory written evidence that the above qualified costs were incurred.
The Note would bear interest at a rate of approximately 6.5%. It is estimated that financial obligations
to the Redeveloper would be satisfied within approximately five (5) years after project completion. That
assumes fiscal disparities are taken from within the district (as per EDA policy), a 5% EDA
administrative fee from the TIF generated by the project, and no inflation. Tax increment needed to
facilitate the proposed project would be derived from the existing Elmwood TIF District.
TIF Lookback
As with other projects involving TIF, the proposed Redevelopment Contract with Greco contains a
“Lookback” provision. The EDA will perform a “lookback” calculation on the earliest of (i) the date
when 95% of the Apartments are leased; (ii) the date of any Transfer in whole or in part of the
Apartments; or (iii) three years after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the
project. The Redeveloper must submit evidence of its actual annualized cumulative internal rate of
return (the “IRR”) from the apartments, calculated as of the applicable Lookback Date, along with
the estimated annualized cumulative IRR from the Apartments assuming a sale in the tenth year
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the Apartments. The amount by which
the IRR exceeds 20% (annual cash-on-cash return of 10% and 10% from net sale proceeds) is
considered Excess Income. If the EDA determines that there is Excess Income, it will apply fifty
percent (50%) of that amount toward prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the
Notes.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 5
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT:
A list of the updated business terms related to a Redevelopment Contract with Greco Development
(Wooddale Pointe Catered Living LLC) is attached for review and discussion. The terms are
consistent with previous redevelopment projects. If these terms are generally acceptable the EDA
will be asked to consider formal approval of the resulting Redevelopment Contract at its upcoming
June 7th meeting.
Business Subsidy
Neither the grant nor the tax increment assistance provided to the Redeveloper under the Agreement
constitute a “business subsidy” under the Business Subsidy Act (Section 116J.993 to 116J.995) because
this is a redevelopment where “the recipient’s investment in the purchase of the site and in site
preparation is 70% or more of the assessor’s current year’s estimated market value”.
Summary
The proposed Wooddale Pointe project has numerous benefits over the current land use. Most
notably, the density of the proposed project would result in a substantial increase in the market value
for the site and hence a greater property tax yield. Visually, it would aesthetically enhance a key
intersection in the city that is directly across the street from the future light rail station. Additionally
it would provide an opportunity for 115 senior assisted living apartments, neighborhood commercial
businesses, a public gathering place and public art. The proposed project conforms to the criteria
outlined in the EDA’s TIF Policy for the provision of tax increment. The purpose for providing the
proposed tax increment is to preserve and enhance the tax base, remediate contamination, redevelop
a substandard area, and provide an impetus for mixed use development which is desirable for
increased population and life-cycle housing within the city.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
It is proposed that $490,000 in tax increment be provided to Wooddale Catered Living LLC in
order to offset some of the Public Redevelopment Costs associated with the proposed Wooddale
Pointe redevelopment enabling the project to move forward.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This project supports the Strategic Directions of providing a well-maintained and diverse housing
stock, being a connected and engaged community, as well as promoting and integrating arts and
community aesthetics in all city initiatives where appropriate.
Attachments: Updated Business Terms for Contract for Private Redevelopment with
Wooddale Pointe Catered Living LLC
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy EDA Executive Director and Deputy City Manager
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 6
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
DRAFT
May 10, 2010
Updated Business Terms
Redevelopment Contract between
City of St. Louis Park,
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
(EDA)
Wooddale Catered Living LLC
(Greco Development)
The Wooddale Pointe
Southeast corner of 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue
St. Louis Park, MN
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 7
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
SUMMARY OF THE UPDATED
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
BETWEEN THE ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND
WOODDALE CATERED LIVING, LLC
The following is summary of the updated Contract for Private Redevelopment (“Contract”) between the
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“EDA”) and Wooddale Catered Living, LLC
(“Redeveloper”) for “The Wooddale Pointe” mixed use building to be constructed at the SE quadrant of
36th Street & Wooddale Ave., St. Louis Park.
1. All parties agree that the Redeveloper will be solely responsible for the acquisition of the subject two
parcels that constitute the Redevelopment Property (Exhibit A) and that the City/EDA has no
obligation to acquire the Redevelopment Property.
2. Redeveloper agrees to hold the EDA and the City harmless from any claim arising out of the
presence of any hazardous wastes or pollutants existing on or in the Redevelopment Property.
3. Redeveloper agrees to submit a Voluntary Response Action plan to the MPCA and obtain all
necessary approvals to properly remediate the subject property so as to allow for the construction of
the Minimum Improvements.
4. Redeveloper agrees that it will pay the reasonable costs of consultants and attorneys retained by the
EDA in connection with the creation of the TIF District and the negotiation in preparation of the
Contract and other incidental agreements and documents related to the development contemplated
hereunder. Upon termination of the Contract, the Redeveloper remains obligated for costs incurred
through the effective date of termination.
5. The Redeveloper must remediate the contaminated soils on the Redevelopment Property in
compliance with MPCA requirements. The Redeveloper also agrees to prepare plans and
specifications for and construct all street, sanitary and storm sewer improvements; sidewalks;
landscaping; and other related amenities and utility work related to the proposed Minimum
Improvements.
6. Before commencing such construction, the Redeveloper must submit plans and specifications
regarding the Minimum Improvements for approval by the City. Plans related to the soil
remediation however do not require approval by the City. All work on the Minimum
Improvements shall be in accordance with the approved construction plans and shall comply
with all City requirements regarding such improvements. The parties agree and understand that
the City will accept the Improvements in accordance with City procedures.
7. Redeveloper agrees to undertake the “Minimum Improvements” as shown in the Master Site Plan
(Exhibit B). In summary, the Redeveloper agrees to purchase the subject two parcels, remediate
the soils, construct a five story, mixed use building consisting of approximately 115 age restricted
apartments, approximately 16,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space, as well as
necessary underground and surface parking along with all associated infrastructure, sidewalks,
landscaping and corner plaza.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 8
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
8. The Redeveloper shall construct an outdoor Plaza as depicted in the Site Plan for the use and
enjoyment of residents and invitees of the Minimum Improvements and members of the general
public. The Plaza shall incorporate amenities to be mutually agreed upon by the City and
Redeveloper, and which may include public art, street furnishings or landscaping, and or
decorative lighting elements. The parties agree that the City shall be responsible for the cost of
any maintenance and repair of the public art. The Redeveloper shall be allowed to perform these
same duties if the EDA fails to do so after the appropriate notice and cure opportunity and to be
reimbursed its costs and expenses.
9. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper agrees to commence construction on the
Minimum Improvements by September 1, 2010 and complete construction of the same by
March 1, 2012.
10. The Redeveloper is initially responsible for: all Public Redevelopment Costs. All Public
Redevelopment Costs are Redeveloper’s initial responsibility and are subject to reimbursement
through tax increment financing.
11. The EDA agrees to disburse proceeds of the Hennepin County Transit Oriented Development
grant it obtained (totaling $355,000) to Redeveloper, minus the $15,975 Application Fee paid by
the EDA to Hennepin County, for specified pedestrian improvements associated with the
Minimum Improvements in accordance with the EDA’s grant agreement with the agency. In order
to reimburse the EDA for its Application Fee the EDA will retain the first $15,975 worth of
qualified reimbursement costs due Redeveloper from Hennepin County.
12. In order to offset the Public Redevelopment Costs incurred by the Redeveloper associated with
the subject property (contamination clean up, site preparation and underground structed
parking), the EDA agrees to issue a pay-as-you-go TIF Note in the maximum principal amount
of $490,000. Tax Increment is to be generated by the proposed Minimum Improvements
located within the existing Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District.
13. The tax increment from the Renewal & Renovation TIF District will be payable to Redeveloper
in the form of a single “TIF Note”, which would be structured on the following basis:
¾ Issue total: Up to $490,000
¾ Type: Pay-as-you-go
¾ Term: Up to 5 years
¾ Interest Rate: Approx 6.5%
¾ Admin Fee: 5%
¾ Fiscal Disparities: Paid from within the district
14. Lookback Provision:
The EDA will perform a “lookback” calculation on the earliest of (i) the date when 95% of the
Apartments are leased; (ii) the date of any Transfer in whole or in part of the Apartments; or (iii)
three years after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the project. The
Redeveloper must submit evidence of its actual annualized cumulative internal rate of return (the
“IRR”) from the Apartments, calculated as of the applicable Lookback Date, along with the
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 9
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
estimated annualized cumulative IRR from the Apartments assuming a sale in the tenth year
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the Apartments. The amount by
which the IRR exceeds twenty percent (20%) is considered Excess Income. If the EDA
determines that there is Excess Income, it will apply fifty percent (50%) of that amount toward
prepayment of the outstanding principal amount of the Notes.
15. Both parties agree that any assistance provided to the Redeveloper under this Agreement is not a
“business subsidy” under Minnesota Statutes, Section 116J.993, subd. 3 because the assistance is for
redevelopment.
16. If Redeveloper requires mortgage financing for the development of the Project, the EDA agrees to
subordinate its rights under the Agreement to the Holder of any Mortgage securing construction or
permanent financing, in accordance with the terms of a mutually-approved subordination
agreement.
17. Redeveloper agrees that the EDA and the City will not be held liable for any loss or damage to
property or any injury to or death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect
in the Redevelopment Property or the Minimum Improvements.
18. The parties agree that the Redeveloper shall be responsible for all maintenance (including snow
and ice removal) and repair costs associated with the Redeveloper Public Improvements on the
Redevelopment Property (“Maintenance Costs”) including:
• Private streets, alleys, driveways, service drives, surface parking stalls and parking
lots.
• Boulevards (excluding public street right of ways)
• Parking structures
• Sidewalks
• Public plaza
• Landscaping
Redeveloper agrees to keep the above Redeveloper Public Improvements in good condition and
is resposibile for all repairs of same. Redeveloper shall not be responsible for the maitenance and
repair of those public improvements typically maintained by the city’s Special Sercvice District
19. Redeveloper agrees to participate in the special service district for the continued maintenance of
the streetscaping along the 36th Street right of way.
20. By no later than December 31, 2011, the Redeveloper shall submit to the EDA for review and
approval a plan for maintenance and operation of all pedestrian and landscaping improvements
located within the Redevelopment Property. The Maintenance Plan must address, at a
minimum: snow removal from pedestrian connections and sidewalks; maintenance and
replacement of landscaping, irrigation and other streetscaping; snow removal and maintenance of
any surface parking and parking lots; and maintenance of the Plaza, but excluding maintenance
covered by the City’s Special Service District, a description of how the Maintenance costs will be
assessed to tenants; and enforcement mechanisms.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 10
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Maintenance in accordance with the Maintenance Plan,
the EDA, at its option and following thirty (30) days written notice to the Redeveloper, may
enter the Redevelopment property and perform the Maintenance. The Redeveloper agrees to
permit the City to specially assess any costs of the Maintenance proportionately against the
Minimum Improvements.
21. Upon satisfactory completion of the Minimum Improvements, the EDA will provide the
Redeveloper with a Certificate of Completion which shall provide that the Redeveloper’s
obligation to construct the Minimum Improvements pursuant to the Redevelopment Agreement
is deemed satisfied.
22. Redeveloper agrees not to transfer the Redevelopment Agreement or the Redevelopment
Property (except to an affiliate) prior to receiving a Certificate of Completion without the prior
written consent of the EDA, except for construction mortgage financing and/or permanent
financing. The EDA's consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. The
EDA agrees to provide its consent or refusal to consent to Redeveloper in writing within 10 days
after a request for such consent from Redeveloper.
23. The Redeveloper agrees to submit to the EDA written reports so as to allow the EDA to remain in
compliance with reporting requirements under state statutes. The EDA will provide information to
the Redeveloper regarding the required forms.
24. The Redeveloper agrees that no portion of the Redevelopment Property will be used for a
sexually-oriented business as defined in City Code, Section 14:5-3(28), a pawnshop, a check-
cashing business, payday loan agency, a tattoo business; or a gun business, and that such
restrictions may be placed in the Redevelopment Deed.
25. The Redeveloper agrees not to discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex or national
origin in the construction and maintenance of the Minimum Improvements and Public
Improvements as well as lease, rental, use or occupancy of the Redevelopment Property or any
improvements erected thereon.
26. Redeveloper acknowledges that the City/EDA makes no representations or warranties as to the
condition of the soils on the Redevelopment Property or its fitness for construction of the
Minimum Improvements.
27. Redeveloper, City and EDA agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless each other and their
officers, employees, and agents from and against all cost, loss, claim, damage or expense, including
reasonable attorney fees, arising out of (i) any injury, property loss or damage whatsoever that results
or arises from the undertakings of the Contract except to the extent such injury, loss or damage
arises from the negligence of the Indemnified Parties; and (ii) any work performed for the benefit of
the Redevelopment Property by a person or entity not a party to this Contract, except to the extent
such claim arises from a party directly engaged by the Indemnified Parties.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 11
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
EXHIBIT A
REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
The subject Redevelopment Property includes all or portions of the following two (2) properties
and as reflected in the Master Site Plan.
PID: 1611721340027
City Address: 3601 WOODDALE AVE
PID: 1611721340001
City Address: 5810 37th St W
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 2) Page 12
Subject: Updated Business Terms for Redevelopment Contract with Greco Dev (Wooddale Pointe project)
EXHIBIT B
Master Site Plan
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 3
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Cedar Knoll Dog Park
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No action at this time. The report is intended to provide information related to the dog park. Staff
requests feedback from Council.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
What additional steps should staff undertake to operate the off-leash dog park at Cedar Knoll Park?
BACKGROUND:
Task Force
In 2004, the City Council appointed 11 people to a task force to review the creation of off-leash dog
parks in the City of St. Louis Park. The task force, along with input from staff, toured and evaluated
14 potential sites in the City. The following criterion was considered when each site was evaluated:
minimal sizes of one acre, varied terrain, adequate parking close to the site, easy street access, and (if
possible) close to trails for walking dogs once they are on a leash.
The task force met several times, created a survey, and participated in public meetings. After
reviewing comments received from public meeting input, survey data and current users, the task
force made the following recommendations:
• Dakota Park is the number one choice for a permanent off-leash site to be opened. (The city
currently operates an off-leash dog park at this site.)
• A great location for an off-leash site would be at 40th and France. This site is owned by the
City of Minneapolis.
• If the city is unable to operate an off-leash area at 40th and France, a second permanent site
would be at Cedar Knoll Park. (The city currently operates an off-leash dog park at this site.)
Excess Land
The land that is currently the Cedar Knoll off-leash dog park site was also considered excess public
land and was studied as a part of that process. In 2005, the task force for excess public land made the
following recommendation about this site in Resolution No. 05-168, item 4, Resolution
Determining the Future Use of Certain Excess Public Lands:
Parcel 12. If this parcel is not deemed by the City Council to be necessary for use as an off-leash
dog park and retained in public ownership, then City staff is directed to seek development
proposals and take the necessary steps to sell to a developer with demonstrated capability, the
property located at 2601 Pennsylvania Avenue South; and identified as Parcel 12 for the purpose
of developing up to four single family homes on the site. Potential buyers shall be made aware of
train noise.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Subject: Cedar Knoll Dog Park
The neighborhood was informed that if the site was not developed as an off-leash dog park site, it
would be developed as single family homes. When presented with the option, the neighborhood
said they would rather have an off-leash site that utilizes only a portion of the city property.
Recent Improvements to the Off-leash Dog Park
At the request of a neighboring resident, staff has made several changes to the Cedar Knoll off-leash
site which include:
• The entrance gate at the Cedar Knoll site was moved to the east to shift users away from
resident homes.
• A berm with plantings was created as a natural fence at the Cedar Knoll site. The berm is 4
to 5 feet high with plantings for an additional 3 to 4 feet that will continue grow higher and
wider. The plantings include dog woods, spruce trees and arborvitae.
• New signage (in addition to the typical signs found at off-leash sites) was installed to
encourage dog park users to be courteous of the adjoining property owners at near the dog
park.
Additional Requests by a Resident to Construct a Fence
The same resident who requested the improvements listed above has questioned the zoning of the
property at Cedar Knoll Park. In checking with Community Development Department, the Off-
Leash Dog Park is an acceptable use zoning use at the location based on city codes. This resident has
also requested that a wooden fence be constructed along the north border of the off-leash dog park.
Staff is limited to constructing a 6 feet high fence without requesting a variance. Staff will need to
review the fencing option based on city code, setback and cost. Fencing is not included in our
budget at this time. The following cost estimates are dependent on design:
• 100’ of 6’ high cedar privacy fence = $2,500.00
• 100’ of 8’ high cedar privacy fence = $5,000.00 (includes engineering fee)
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The creation of a fence would cost between $2,500 and $5,000 which is not included in the 2010
budget. A fence could be viewed as a capital expense and could potentially be paid for using money
from the Park Improvement Fund.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Off-Leash Dog parks are part of our connected and engaged community.
Attachments: Pictures of berm created at Cedar Knoll Park Off-Leash Dog Park
Map showing City property and boundary of the Cedar Knoll Off-Leash
Dog Park
Prepared by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Subject: Cedar Knoll Dog Park
Dog Park Area
City propery line
¯
Carlson field
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 3)
Subject:Cedar Knoll Dog Park Page 4
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 4
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Council Policy Discussion – Environmental Stewardship – Councilmembers Sanger and Mavity.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Councilmembers Sanger and Mavity have asked that this topic be placed on the agenda for a policy
discussion.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to discuss this topic in greater detail at a future study session?
BACKGROUND:
Councilmembers Sanger and Mavity have requested that this matter be placed on the Study Session
to allow them to discuss a policy question with the City Council regarding the City’s role with
environmental stewardship as related to Vision St. Louis Park and the City Councils Strategic
Direction related to the environment.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None at this time.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
One of the City Councils adopted Strategic Directions states that “St. Louis Park is committed to
being a leader in environmental stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and
responsibility in all areas of city business”.
Attachments: Environmental Stewardship in St. Louis Park as prepared by
Councilmembers Sanger and Mavity
Prepared and Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Subject: Council Policy Discussion – Environmental Stewardship
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP IN ST. LOUIS PARK
Goals:
• Ensure that SLP continues to be a good steward of its’ natural resources and the environment
• Ensure that SLP continuously explores proactive strategies and creates opportunities to
protect existing natural resources
• Ensure that SLP is a leader among peer communities in protection of natural resources
• Ensure that SLP addresses gaps in current approach to environmental and natural resource
protection
• Provide opportunities and structure to ensure the implementation of the environmental
priorities outlined in Vision SLP
Current structure and processes:
• Staff initiates selected projects which promote environmental sustainability and protection –
i.e. green building ordinance, tree planting
• Staff ensures that city complies with environmental regulations – i.e. wetland preservation
• No one is specifically accountable for the inter-departmental “big picture” – to seek and
advocate for multiple and ongoing opportunities to improve the city’s environmental
stewardship, consistent with Vision SLP
• There is no established entity or process for citizen input on environmental matters
Objective:
Develop process for ongoing assessment, consideration and recommendation to the city staff and
Council of programs and practices to promote overall environmental stewardship and health,
conservation and protection of natural resources, in areas including but not limited to:
• Vegetation
• Open space
• Water resources – i.e. develop Minnehaha creek as community amenity
• Community aesthetics
• Recycling
• Community development
• Etc.
Recommendation:
Establish a time-limited resident task force to study and recommend:
• An appropriate structure/entity/vehicle for ongoing citizen input and recommendations to
staff and Council for implementation of Vision SLP (examples of possible outcomes: a new
Commission, expanded scope and membership of existing Commission(s), proposed new
ordinances, additional project approval processes, etc)
• An appropriate mission statement for such entity, if such an entity is recommended
• Key issues for further exploration
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 5
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Future Study Session Agenda Planning – May 17 and May 24.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for the Special Study Session on May 17 and the
regularly scheduled Study Session on May 24, 2010.
In addition to looking at the May 17 and May 24 Study Session agendas, the City Manager would
also like to outline for the Council other topics identified for future discussion by the Council as a
means to understand the Council’s sense of order of priority for these items.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council agree with the agenda as proposed?
BACKGROUND:
At each study session, approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next study session
agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the tentative agenda and proposed discussion items
for the regularly scheduled study session on May 24, 2010. In addition, on occasion, special study
sessions are required as is the case for May 17. For that reason, please find attached the tentative
agenda and proposed discussion item scheduled for that date.
In the past the City Council has also indentified various topics for further discussion that have not
yet made it on a study session agenda. The City Manager would like to summarize these with the
City Council at the meeting and get a sense of what the Council’s priorities might be in terms of the
timing for discussing these items.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
None.
Attachment: Future Study Session Agenda Planning for May 17 and May 24, 2010
Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager, HR Director
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 5) Page 2
Subject: Future Study Session
Tentative Discussion Item
Special Study Session, Monday, May 17, 2010 – 6:30 p.m.
1. Louisiana Court – Community Development (45 minutes)
Staff will discuss with City Council the financial status and potential re-financing of Project
for Pride in Living’s (PPL) Louisiana Court Development.
End of Meeting: 7:15 p.m.
Tentative Discussion Items
Study Session, Monday, May 24, 2010 – 6:30 p.m.
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
2. Update on Light Rail and Freight Rail Studies – Community Development (30 minutes)
Staff will provide updates on the status of the various rail studies.
3. Review and Discuss Results of the City Council Workshop – Administration (45 minutes)
This discussion will allow for a review of the results of the February City Council Workshop
including City Council Norms and the Saturday Brainstorming session.
4. Communications – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session
agenda for the purposes of information sharing.
Reports:
April 2010 Monthly Financial Statements
City/School Cable TV Operations Agreement
End of Meeting: 7:55 p.m.
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 6
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Communications (Verbal).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Not Applicable.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
BACKGROUND:
At every Study Session, verbal communications will take place between staff and Council for the
purpose of information sharing.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
Attachments: None
Prepared and Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 7
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Potential EDA acquisition of 7015 Walker Street (former Reynolds Welding Supply building).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
City staff requests feedback on the EDA’s potential purchase of 7015 Walker Street.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the EDA wish to consider purchasing the subject property?
BACKGROUND:
The former Reynolds Welding Supply property is located in the Lenox Neighborhood at 7015
Walker Street. (between Highway 7 on the south and Walker Street on the north). It was recently
vacated and the owner is motivated to sell it. The property is approximately ½ acre and is occupied
by a building of less than 3,000 square feet. The structure was originally constructed in 1949 and
expanded in 1979. Staff recently toured the building and confirmed that it is in as rough a shape on
the inside as it is on the outside. A 2002 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment indicates that the
plume of groundwater contamination associated with the Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation
which formerly operated in the area extends below the subject property.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 7) Page 2
Subject: Potential EDA Acquisition of 7015 Walker Street
Current Land Use
The subject property is currently zoned and guided General Commercial (C2).
Property Value
The current assessed value of the subject property is $495,500. Most of the property’s value is in the
land which is assessed at $404,000 or $20 per square foot due to the property’s highway visibility.
Why Purchase the Subject Property?
Due to the building’s condition and obsolescence staff believes that unless the site is cleared the
likely future uses of the property will not be an asset to the community. The primary reason for
acquisition would be blight removal along the highly visible Highway 7 corridor. In conformance
with the Comprehensive Plan, the EDA has been actively redeveloping this corridor between
Wooddale and Louisiana Avenues. Acquiring the subject property would be consistent with those
efforts. A secondary reason for acquisition is that it may aid in the property assemblage for the future
Highway 7/Louisiana interchange. The subject property could potentially be used for stormwater
retention associated with the interchange and possibly the neighborhood to the north.
If the EDA were to acquire the subject property, given its impacted condition, staff would seek
MPCA approval to remove the building in such a manner as not to necessitate the cleanup of any
contaminated soils beneath. A similar approach was recently taken with the former American Inn
property. The EDA would then hold the property until the future use of the property became clear.
Purchasing and clearing the property prevents the building from falling into further disrepair and
becoming a blighting influence on the adjacent neighborhoods. It would also improve the property’s
aesthetic appearance from the adjacent highway.
Based upon review of comparable land sales information with the City Assessor the acquisition price
of the subject property is very reasonable and below market.
Terms of Acquisition
Terms for a potential purchase agreement include the following:
• Purchase price is approximately $295,000 or $14.53 a square foot.
• Buyer’s purchase of the Property would be conditioned upon:
1. Seller’s ability to provide marketable title to the Property
2. Seller’s payment of any outstanding property taxes, assessments and penalties at
Closing
• Preparation of a Purchase Agreement acceptable to both parties.
• Formal approval of the Purchase Agreement by the EDA.
• Closing would occur no later than June 30th.
The cost to demolish and remove the former building would be less than $100,000. This estimate
includes utility disconnects but excludes any hazardous waste removal.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 7) Page 3
Subject: Potential EDA Acquisition of 7015 Walker Street
How would the property acquisition and ancillary costs be funded?
Purchase of the subject property would be paid for through the Development Fund. Costs related to
the building demolition would also be paid for through the Development Fund.
Next Steps
If the EDA is interested in acquiring the subject property staff will have an updated Phase I
environmental assessment completed and a formal purchase agreement prepared. Such an agreement
would subsequently be presented to the EDA for review and approval. Upon purchase, the EDA
would enter the property in the MPCA’s VIC program so as to obtain a No Association
Determination related to the groundwater contamination and other possible contaminants
impacting the property. The EDA would also submit a Voluntary Remediation Action Plan (VRAP)
for the removal of the building. Once the EDA received all the necessary approvals from the MPCA
it would have the building removed.
Current economic conditions may provide more opportunities for strategic property acquisitions in
the near future. As these opportunities present themselves staff will bring them to the EDA’s
attention for consideration.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The EDA is requested to consider the acquisition of 7015 Walker Street for $295,000. The EDA
could incur addition costs related to building demolition and some environmental costs.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This project supports the Strategic Directions of providing well-maintained [neighborhoods], being
a connected and engaged community, as well as promoting community aesthetics.
Attachments: None
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, EDA Deputy Executive Director & Deputy City Manager
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 8
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bonds Refinancing for Phase I and Debt Issuance for
Phase II.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None at this time. This report is intended to update the City Council on a request from Groves
Academy to refinance the private activity revenue bonds that were issued on July 15, 2009 for Phase
I and issue debt for Phase II, which is the final phase.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to proceed with issuing the private activity revenue bonds as proposed?
If so, proposed process is consistent with our approved policy for issuing private activity revenue
bonds.
BACKGROUND:
Groves Academy is requesting that the City of St. Louis Park issue private activity revenue bonds for
the purposes of refunding existing debt and financing the second and final phase of an expansion of
their facilities. The principal amount of the Series 2010 bonds will be approximately $4,590,000.
Groves Academy has completed the necessary planning and zoning processes to allow them to
expand their campus. They will also be financing internal improvements to their facilities to
enhance their educational operations.
The synopsis of the process for issuing these bonds will include a public hearing which is proposed
for the regular City Council meeting of June 7, 2010. After the public hearing has been closed, the
City Council will be asked to consider a preliminary resolution authorizing issuance of the bonds
through Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, who is operating as the placement agent for this transaction.
If the City Council approves the preliminary resolution, then the City Council would be requested
to consider a final resolution at the regular meeting of June 21, 2010 allowing the bonds to be issued
on a date agreed upon by the parties. Attached is a description of the entire process as prepared by
Kennedy & Graven for the Council’s review.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Groves Academy has provided the City with a new application, which is on file in the City Clerk’s
office, along with the required fee of $2,500 in accordance with our policy. These bonds are not
obligations of the city in any respect, but rather are payable solely from revenues of the Groves
Academy. They will also pay a fee of 1/8th of one percent in two semi-annual payments to the City
on based on the amount of bonds outstanding each year. These monies will be deposited in the
City’s Housing Rehabilitation fund.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 8) Page 2
Subject: Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bonds Refinancing for Phase I and Debt Issuance for Phase II
VISION CONSIDERATION:
By working with other entities such as Groves Academy, the City of St. Louis Park is demonstrating
its commitment to being a connected and engaged community.
Attachment: Description of the project and timeline from Kennedy & Graven
Prepared by: Brian A. Swanson, Controller
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bonds Refinancing for Phase I and Debt Issuance for Phase II Page 3
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bonds Refinancing for Phase I and Debt Issuance for Phase II Page 4
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 8)
Subject: Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bonds Refinancing for Phase I and Debt Issuance for Phase II Page 5
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 9
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Proposed Housekeeping Amendments regarding staff positions and municipal elections.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None required at this time. This report serves as official notice to Council that the Charter
Commission, at their March 10th and April 14th, 2010, unanimously recommended that the City
Council amend Sections 4.03, 4.06, 6.09. 6.10 of the City Charter.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to amend Sections 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, 6.10 of the St. Louis Park City
Charter regarding staff positions and municipal election housekeeping changes, as recommended by
the Charter Commission?
Does the City Council wish to amend Sections 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, 32-99 of the St. Louis
Park City Code regarding staff position housekeeping changes?
BACKGROUND:
With the recent adoption of 2010 state legislative election laws and changes to city staff positions,
housekeeping amendments to the St. Louis Park City Charter and City Code of Ordinances are
necessary for consistency. Draft ordinances are attached to this report. The City Charter and City
Code housekeeping amendments are as follows:
City Charter Housekeeping Amendments
Minnesota Statute § 410.12, Subd. 7 provides that upon recommendation of the Charter Commission
the City Council may enact a charter amendment by ordinance. The ordinance is enacted if it receives
a unanimous vote of the entire city council.
At the Charter Commission meetings on March 10 and April 14, 2010, Commissioners
unanimously voted to recommend that the City Council pass an ordinance amending Charter
Sections 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, and 6.10. The Charter Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed
housekeeping amendments at the request of staff and the City Attorney for the following reasons:
Section 4.03 and 4.06 provides reference to municipal elections and candidate filing
requirements. The Minnesota Legislature amended state statutes to provide that state and
municipal primary elections be held on the second Tuesday in August and candidate filing
period dates be changed to allow for additional time for overseas absentee voting. Amending
these sections in the City Charter will maintain consistency with state election laws.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 9) Page 2
Subject: Housekeeping Amendments Municipal Elections and Staff Positions
Charter Sections 6.09 and 6.10 provide reference to the “director of finance” as the lead finance
position with specific duties. With the Finance Director resignation, it was determined through
reorganization by the City Manager that the position would be titled Controller and would serve
as the City Treasurer. Assistant Finance Director Brian Swanson accepted the Controller
position and was appointed City Treasurer on February 1, 2010 by Resolution No. 10-011. All
references to “director of finance” were amended to be consistently replaced with “City
Treasurer”.
Timeline:
City Attorney Roger Knutson has drafted the ordinance changes (attached) and provided a timeline
for the changes. The timeline/process, assuming that the Council is in agreement, would be as
follows:
1. Within a month of city council’s receipt of the Charter’s recommendation (May 10, 2010)
publish public hearing notice containing text of ordinance. Publication date: May 20, 2010
2. City Council is required to hold a public hearing at least 2 weeks, but not more than 4 weeks
after notice is published. First Reading: June 7, 2010
3. Within a month of the public hearing the City Council must vote. The ordinance approval
requires unanimous vote of the entire City Council. Second Reading: June 21, 2010
4. The ordinance is effective 90 days after publication (July 1, 2010)
Effective Date: September 29, 2010
City Code of Ordinances Housekeeping Amendments related to Staff Positions
In addition to Charter amendments regarding staff positions, housekeeping amendments will also be
necessary for City Code Sections 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, and 32-99. All references to
“director of finance” will require amending to be consistently replaced with “City Treasurer”. First
Reading is scheduled for June 7, 2010 with Second Reading scheduled for June 21, 2010.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
None.
Attachments: Draft Ordinance amending City Charter municipal elections/staff positions
Draft Ordinance amending City Code staff positions
Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Roger Knutson, City Attorney
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 9) Page 3
Subject: Housekeeping Amendments Municipal Elections and Staff Positions
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. ____-10
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
HOME RULE CHARTER SECTIONS 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, 6.10
CONCERNING MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS
AND CITY POSITION TITLES
PREAMBLE
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 410.12, Subd. 7 the Charter Commission has
recommended to the City Council that the Charter be amended as provided herein; and
WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 410.12, Subd. 7 provides that upon recommendation of the
Charter Commission the City Council may enact a Charter Amendment by ordinance.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. The St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter Sections 4.03, 4.06, 6.09, and 6.10
are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language:
Section 4.03. Primary Elections.
The Council shall, whenever three (3) or more candidates have filed for any elective City office,
provide through ordinance or resolution for a primary election to be held for each such office. The
primary election shall be held on the first second Tuesday after the second Monday in September
August. At least two (2) weeks' notice shall be given by the Clerk of the time and places of holding
such election, and of the officers to be elected, by posting a notice thereof in at least one (1) public
place in each voting precinct where a primary election will be held and by publishing a notice thereof
at least once in the official newspaper of the City. Failure to give such notice shall not invalidate such
election.
Section 4.06. Nomination by Petition.
The nomination of elective officers provided for by this Charter shall be by petition. The name of
any nominee shall be printed upon the ballot whenever a petition meeting the requirements specified
in this Charter has been filed on the nominee's behalf with the City Clerk. Such petition shall be
signed by at least fifteen (15) currently registered electors qualified to vote for the office specified in
the petition. No elector shall sign petitions for more candidates than the number of places to be
filled at the election, and should the elector do so that signature shall be void as to the petition or
petitions last filed. All nomination petitions shall be filed with the City Clerk not no more than ten
(10) eighty four (84) days nor fewer less than eight (8) weeks seventy (70) days and fifty-six (56)
days before the first second Tuesday after the second Monday in September August before the
general city election. The Clerk shall prepare the ballots with names of the candidates for an office
in a manner provided by ordinance. Each petition, when presented, must be accompanied by a
twenty dollar ($20.00) filing fee.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 9) Page 4
Subject: Housekeeping Amendments Municipal Elections and Staff Positions
Section 6.09. Levy and Collection of Taxes.
Each year the Council shall levy the taxes necessary to meet the requirements of the budget for the
ensuing fiscal year in the manner prescribed by State law. The Director of Finance City Treasurer
shall transmit a statement of the taxes levied to the County Auditor annually. Such taxes shall be
collected and their payment shall be enforced at the time and in the same manner as State and
County taxes. No tax shall be invalid because of any informality in the manner of levying the same,
nor because the amount levied exceeds the amount required to be raised for the purpose for which it
was levied. Any surplus shall go into a suspense fund, and shall be used to reduce the levy for the
ensuing year.
Section 6.10. Tax Settlement with County.
The Director of Finance City Treasurer shall ensure that all monies in the County Treasury
belonging to the City are promptly turned over to the City according to law.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect ninety days after its publication.
Date of Publication of Public Hearing May 20, 2010
Public Hearing and First Reading June 7, 2010
Second Reading June 21, 2010
Date of Publication of adopted Ordinance July 1, 2010
Date Ordinance takes effect September 29, 2010
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 9) Page 5
Subject: Housekeeping Amendments Municipal Elections and Staff Positions
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. ____-10
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
ORDINANCE CODE SECTIONS 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, and 32-99
CONCERNING CITY POSITION TITLES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Sections 2-350, 2-351, 18-203, 32-34, and 32-
99 are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language:
Sec. 2-350. Manner of Presentation of Claims
All bills, invoices, statements and claims for payment of money in discharge of any obligation of the
City shall be filed with the Director of Finance City Treasurer who shall examine the same and enter
each upon the record. Each claim shall be accompanied by either an itemized bill or payroll, or time
sheet, each of which shall be approved and signed by the responsible City officer who vouches for its
correctness and reasonableness and, except in the case of salaries and wages of employees and laborers
of the City, shall be accompanied by the claimant’s verified statement of claim as required by law.
Sec 2-351. Payment of Claims
The Director of Finance City Treasurer is authorized to pay all claims determined to be proper
obligations of the City and consistent with the budget approved by the City Council. The Director
of Finance City Treasurer shall prepare a list of newly paid claims for Council review at each regular
meeting of the City Council.
Sec. 18-203. Disposition of Funds.
Together with found money that has been held for 60 days, the chief of police must deliver all
money that was received from the sale of abandoned property to the finance director City Treasurer
for deposit into the city’s general fund. If no claim has been made by the former owner with
satisfactory proof of ownership, found money may be returned to the finder; otherwise the money
will revert to the city's general fund.
Sec. 32-34. Delinquent water accounts.
All charges for water shall be due and payable within three weeks of the billing date specified by the
director of finance City Treasurer. Accounts shall be considered delinquent and subject to a penalty
of ten percent if not paid within three weeks of the billing date. It shall be the duty of the director of
finance City Treasurer to endeavor to promptly collect delinquent accounts, and in all cases where
satisfactory arrangements for payments have not then been made, the director of public works shall
be instructed to discontinue water service at the stop box. All delinquent accounts shall be certified
by the city clerk to the city assessor who shall prepare an assessment roll each year providing for
assessment of the delinquent amounts against the respective properties served, for collection as other
taxes.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 9) Page 6
Subject: Housekeeping Amendments Municipal Elections and Staff Positions
Sec. 32-99. Sewer bills.
It is hereby made the duty of the director of finance City Treasurer to render to the owners, lessees
or occupants of all classes of property on a monthly or quarterly basis, as is appropriate, bills for the
amount of sewer rental charge as provided in section 32-97. Such bills may be a surcharge upon the
water bills rendered to such persons. All such charges when collected shall be placed in a separate
fund. These funds shall be used only for the purpose authorized by M.S.A. § 444.075, and such
charges, if unpaid, may be collected on direction of the city council as authorized by M.S.A. §
444.075, as set forth in sections 32-97, 32-98 and this section.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
First Reading June 7, 2010
Second Reading June 21, 2010
Date of Publication July 1, 2010
Date Ordinance takes effect July 16, 2010
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 10
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
City Council Bike Ride
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Provide staff direction on the following to questions. Does City Council still want to do this bike
ride? Does City Council have any suggested changes to the planned route or specific points of
interest to see?
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
BACKGROUND:
In 2009, City Council requested staff organize a bicycle ride that would highlight some existing
sidewalk and bicycle gaps or proposed improvements. Due to inclement weather, the autumn bike
tour was cancelled. The tour has been rescheduled for 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on May 24, 2010,
preceding the City Council Study Session.
Attached is a map of the planned bike route. Staff needs to test the route, so it may need to change.
The final route will be shared with City Council before the meeting and will be about 5-6 miles
long. The ride will be a leisurely pace. There will be several planned stops along the route to discuss
points of interest. Staff will lead the tour and we will be joined by one of City of Minneapolis’ Bike
Ambassadors.
As you will see, the planned route excludes regional trails and focuses instead on low traffic
neighborhood streets that lend themselves to biking, even during rush hour. These streets may be
candidates for what are termed “share the road” or “bike-walk streets.” The route highlights several
important rail or road crossings identified in the bike plan and examples of sidewalk gaps identified
in the pedestrian plan.
Unfortunately, several of the high priority bike lanes identified in the bike plan are out of reach
given the time constraints. We want this to be a comfortable and fun ride, not a speed or endurance
test.
EQUIPMENT NEEDS:
If you do not have a bike helmet or do not have an operable bike (tires that hold air and brakes that
work), please contact Sean Walther at (952) 924-2574 or swalther@stlouispark.org to make
arrangements. One Councilmember cannot ride, so that person can drive to the planned stop
locations and still participate in the discussions.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 10) Page 2
Subject: Council Bike Ride
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
St. Louis Park is a connected and engaged community.
Attachments: Route Map
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Parks and Recreation Director
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 10) Page 3
Subject: Council Bike Ride
Start at City Hall
Points of Interest or Discussion Stops:
• POI: Minnetonka Blvd east of Hwy 100 (future 4 to 3 lane conversion?)
• POI: Ottawa & 29th (sidewalk gap)
• POI: 26th & Quentin (sidewalk gap)
• POI: 28th & CP rail (freight rail impact?)
• Discuss: Peter Hobart Elementary School (Future Rail Crossing)
• Discuss: Dakota & Minnetonka (Intersection Improvements)
• Discuss: Dakota & Lake (Dakota/Wooddale north-south connection)
• POI: Lake & Brunswick (ped/bike rail crossing)
• Discuss: Hwy 7 Pedestrian Bridge
Additional Stops Time Permitting:
• Discuss: Beltline & Regional Trail Crossing
• POI: Trail behind Melrose Institute
• Discuss: 36th & Beltline (future 4 to 3 lane conversion?)
End at City Hall
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 11
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Fire Stations Project Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No action is needed at this time. This report provides a summary of planned neighborhood
meetings and tasks through the Schematic Design Phase for Fire Stations No. 1 and No. 2.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Is the City Council comfortable with the proposed schedule and the number of neighborhood input
and City Council engagement opportunities proposed for the Schematic Design Phase outlined in
this report?
BACKGROUND:
The design process for the fire stations is expected to take about 10 months from initial schematic
design to letting bids for construction. The design process has 3 major components,
1. the initial design work or schematic design;
2. design development when the initial designs are refined and
3. construction documents, when the design concepts are transformed into plans and
specifications ready for bidding.
Cost estimates for each station will be prepared at each step in the design process to help with
decision making; and at each stage in the process the City Council will approve moving on to the
next stage of design.
Three general neighborhood meetings are anticipated in the early stages of the project. The first
design meeting will be to introduce the fire station design team, explain the timeline/process, talk
about each site and get neighborhood input about any special concerns or issues neighbors and other
residents may have. The second neighborhood meeting will be an opportunity to share initial design
concepts with the neighborhood and get their input. The third neighborhood meeting would occur
once the City Council’s preferred concepts have been selected. It is one more chance for
neighborhood input before moving on to the more detailed design development in preparation for
formal City approvals.
In addition to the general neighborhood meetings, special purpose community meetings may be
needed. These would be meetings to address particular issues that arise during the design process.
The standard required meetings and public hearings required by zoning would be in addition to the
design process meetings.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 11) Page 2
Subject: Fire Station Project Update
Schedule
During in initial design work or schematic design phase, the City and design consultants will review
the space needs study prepared by BKV Group, learn about the City’s design and operation goals,
analyze the sites, organize the spaces in the building, and generate concept plans and alternatives for
the sites and buildings that respond to the goals and needs.
The schematic design phase is expected to last three months. Subsequent phases of the project
include design development and construction drawings. Plans could be submitted for zoning
approvals in September 2010. The target date to go out for bids would be in late January 2011.
This proposed schedule sets up a Spring 2011 construction start. Of course, the proposed schedule
may be adjusted to respond to issues raised by the City Council, neighborhoods, and other staff
throughout this process.
Public Engagement
Three neighborhood meetings are proposed during the Schematic Design phase. The first public
meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 20. The meeting notice provides additional information
and is attached for your information. Two subsequent meetings are planned for Thursday, June 10
and Thursday, July 15. All the meetings will be held in the Rec Center Banquet Room. Meeting
notices will be mailed to properties surrounding all addresses within 1,500 feet, emailed to
neighborhood leaders for distribution via their websites, email lists, newsletters, etc., and announced
via other city-wide communications (website, Park Update, etc.). Staff also intends to engage
neighborhood leaders or designated neighborhood representatives in-between the large public
meetings, as the neighborhood leaders deem necessary.
City Council Engagement
The schematic design schedule also proposes several dates to update or discuss the project with City
Council. These dates generally occur before and soon after the public meetings.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The City’s budgeted project cost is $14 million dollars. The estimated construction cost is $10.5
million.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not applicable.
Attachments:
• Milestone Schedule (as of May 4, 2010)
• Schematic Design Schedule (as of May 4, 2010)
• Fire Station Public Meeting Notice for May 20, 2010
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief
Cindy Walsh, Parks and Recreation Director
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Two New Fire Stationsi kSt. Louis Park, MNProject No. 1007.1307.01May 3, 2010201020112012Milestone ScheduleTaskSeptSchematic DesignCost EstimatesOwner ApprovalDiDl tNov Dec Jan Feb Mar AprApril May June July Aug OctMarApril May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan FebDesign DevelopmentCost EstimatesOwner ApprovalConstruction DocumentsApproval to BidBiddingContract AwardConstructionCriticalDatesCritical DatesApply for Plan Commission ApprovalPlan Commission Public HearingCouncil ApprovalOctober 6, 2010October 18, 2010September 7, 2010Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 11) Subject: Fire Station Project UpdatePage 3
Two New Fire Stations
St. Louis Park, MN
Project no. 1007.1307.01
May 4, 2010
Tasks Attending Date Remarks
Data Gathering 04/15/2010 to Property Surveys
Present Previous Studies
Project Directory
Schematic Design Schedule
1 Kick‐Off Meeting Design Team 5/3/2010 Fire Deparement Goals
Program Verification Review previous information
City Council Presentation 5/3/2010 Council to Approve Selection
2 Schematic Site Planning Design Team 5/10/2010 1 ‐ 3:30pm Concept site plans
3 Scope Verification Management Team 5/17/2010 1 ‐2 pm Project Scope Verification
hiildi li i //b ildi lSchematic Building Planning Design Team 5/17/2010 2 ‐ 3:30 pm Concept building plans
Neighborhood Meeting No. 1 5/20/2010 Vision Setting Session
4 Building Planning Massing Design Team 5/24/2010 1‐3:30 pm Reivew of Neighborhood Mtg. Goals
5 Building Planning/Massing Design Team 6/2/2010 1‐3:30 pm Mtg moved due to Memorial Day
Fire Department Review progress with Department
6 Building Planning/Massing Management Team 6/7/2010 1‐3:30 pm Project Review6Building Planning/Massing Management Team 6/7/2010 1‐3:30 pm Project Review
City Council 6/7/2010 Written Report by Staff
Neighborhood Meeting No. 2 6/10/2010 Site/Plan Concepts w/ massing
7 Building Planning ‐ Station no. 2 Design Team 6/14/2010 1‐3:30 pm Review Results of Neigborhood Mtg.
Detailed Planning/Imagery
8 Building Planning ‐ Station no. 1 Design Team 6/21/2010 1‐3:30 pm Detailed Planning/Imageryg g g p ggy
City Council 6/21/2010 Detailed Report by Team
9 Project Update Management Team 6/28/2010 1‐2 pm Resolve Parks Bounaries
Building Planning ‐Administration Design Team 2‐3:30 pm Training Components
July 4 th Week
10 Building Planning ‐ Living Quarters Design Team 7/12/2010 1‐3:30 Building Imagery
No Meetings
Pricing Package to KA 7/14/2010
Potential Council Presentation 7/12/2010 Present preferred concept
Neighborhood Meeting No. 3 7/15/2010 Preferred Concept
11 Project Update Management Team 7/19/2010 1‐2 pm Review Results of Neigborhood Mtg.
Building Planning ‐ Apparatus Bay Design Team 2‐3:30 pm Building Imagery
12 Pricing Review Management Team 7/26/2010 Budget reconciliation
Other Critical Dates
Pricing Package to KA 7/14/2010
Board Packet Due 28‐Jul‐10
Coucil Approval of Schematic Design 2‐Aug‐10
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 11)
Subject: Fire Station Project Update Page 4
May 7, 2010
Dear Resident:
I’d like to thank you for your continued interest in the city’s upcoming fire station
replacement projects I’d also like to invite you to a neighborhood meeting about both
stations that is scheduled for:
6:45 p.m., Thursday, May 20 at the Rec Center Banquet Room, 3700 Monterey Drive
Since my last letter in February, the city hired the team of KKE Architects, Bonestroo and
SRF Consulting Group to design and engineer two new and expanded fire stations to replace
the two existing fire stations. Both stations will be rebuilt in about the same location.
We want to introduce you to the design team and discuss the process and schedule. More
importantly, we will be asking for your thoughts and opinions. What are your concerns?
What are do you see as the goals and opportunities? What you tell us now will guide the
design options you’ll see later.
The meeting on May 20 will begin with a 30-minute presentation. Following the
presentation, we will break into two groups. One group will focus on Fire Station No. 1 and
the other will focus on Station No. 2.
Next Steps
The design team and I hope to meet with you and other neighbors in June to review design
options, and again in July to discuss the City’s preferred option. The City will continue to
invite input at various stages of the design process and regularly communicate with the
public throughout design and construction. While construction of the stations won’t begin
until 2011, some site preparation work like demolition and moving private utilities on the
site could begin this summer.
About the Current Stations
Some of you may be new to the neighborhood or missed previous letters and meetings about
this project. Unfortunately, the two buildings that house the people and equipment that
help the Fire Department provide fire protection and emergency medical services are just
plain wearing out. Based on a thorough analysis, the city has determined that it has no
choice but to replace its two existing stations.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 11)
Subject: Fire Station Project Update Page 5
Both of thefire stations were constructed in the 1960’s. They do not meet accessibility rules
for public buildings. They do not accommodate the current multi-gender Fire Department
staffing. Other concerns relate to deteriorating structural elements, the aging mechanical
systems, limited ventilation, lack of apparatus storage space, and insufficient meeting space to
host all firefighters simultaneously for meetings and training.
I’d like to thank you in advance for taking the time to learn about these important capital
projects the city is undertaking. I invite you to contact project coordinator Sean Walther if
you have any questions. Mr. Walther can be reached at (952) 924-2574 or
swalther@stlouispark.org.
Sincerely,
Luke Stemmer
St. Louis Park Fire Chief
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 11)
Subject: Fire Station Project Update Page 6
Meeting Date: May 10, 2010
Agenda Item #: 12
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Reilly Site – Update on the Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The purpose of this report is to provide an update to an EPA / MPCA agency requested soil vapor
gas study at the Reilly Superfund site.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None at this time.
BACKGROUND:
History
Staff provided Council a written Study Session Report on July 27th 2009 (attached) providing
information regarding a soil vapor gas study on the “Reilly” site requested by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
During August of 2009, city staff informed the property owners and area residents of the proposed
study and then submitted a draft study to Vertellus Specialties Inc. (formerly Reilly Industries) and
the agencies for review and evaluation. The study, planned to be done on private property, was
expected to be conducted during early 2010 with study results available by June of 2010.
During the review and evaluation of the draft study, Vertellus and City staff concluded neither
agency was responsible for performing the requested study. This was recently conveyed by Vertellus
and the City to the EPA and MPCA. The EPA or the MPCA are able to pursue this study with the
two property owners should they feel the need; neither has expressed an interest in that to date.
No communications with the property owners or residents have taken place since last August.
Next Steps
Staff intends to contact the two property owners shortly to inform them of the situation and their
options in the matter.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Last July the cost of this proposed study was estimated to exceed $100,000; mitigation measures, if
found necessary, would be an additional cost. At this time, it is felt that the EPA, the MPCA, or the
property owners are responsible for any further study of the soil vapor gas concern.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 12) Page 2
Subject: Reilly Site – Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This study was requested by the agencies to ensure there are no soil gas vapor intrusion concerns
associated with the residential properties on the Reilly Site. The proposed study generally aligns
with the following Council adopted vision Strategic Direction:
St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. We
will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
Focus (in this case) would be on:
• Educating staff and the public on environmental consciousness,
stewardship and best practices.
• Preserving, enhancing and providing good stewardship of our parks.
Attachments: Study Session Report of July 27, 2009
Prepared by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager, HR Director
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 12) Page 3
Subject: Reilly Site – Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study
Meeting Date: July 27, 2009
Agenda Item #: 10
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Reilly Site - Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The purpose of this report is to provide information regarding a proposed soil vapor gas study at the
Reilly Superfund site. Please provide staff with any comments or questions that you might have.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
None at this time.
BACKGROUND:
History
In 2006 the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) conducted a Five-Year Review of the
Reilly Site. According to their review:
“The potential for vapor intrusion is another issue which will be evaluated. No vapor
assessments have been performed for the Site. Further evaluation will be performed of
the potential for vapor intrusion into buildings on the Site. If necessary, soil gas
sampling and/or indoor monitoring will be performed.”
This work was being recommended to address a general concern at Superfund Sites throughout the
country and was not triggered by any indication of actual exposures to volatile chemicals. In fact, no
cases of creosote odors or exposure to soil gas have been reported to the city, MPCA, or United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) by persons living at the Reilly Site.
This recommendation was followed up in 2008 by a MPCA soil vapor survey to investigate the
potential for soil gas on the Reilly Site. Survey results indicated soil gas vapors were present
throughout the surveyed area. The 2008 survey report recommended that a follow-up soil vapor
survey be conducted. Property owners on the Reilly Site were made aware of this survey and survey
results.
On April 1, 2009 the city and Vertellus Specialties Inc. (formerly Reilly Industries) received a
specific request from the USEPA and the MPCA to plan a vapor intrusion study (letter attached). A
planning meeting was held on July 13th attended by City, Vertellus, Minnesota Department of
Health, and MPCA staff. Generally, most of the persons attending this meeting were involved with
the Hwy 7/Wooddale Ave VOC Study recently conducted in St. Louis Park.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 12) Page 4
Subject: Reilly Site – Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study
Proposed Study
The proposed study would be conducted in accordance with appropriate MPCA guidance
documents for such investigations. The study is anticipated to include the following elements:
• winter time sampling when vapor concentrations are likely highest.
• coring / sampling through concrete floors to access sub-slab gas at the rate of one per 1,000
square feet – approximately 100 points to be sampled.
• target properties identified were Somerset Oak Apartments in the northwest area of the Site
and Oak Park Village Apartments in the northeast area of the site. Only slab on grade
residential properties will need to be evaluated.
• sampling to be done only with property / building owner authorization.
• study results will be made publicly available when complete.
This study as currently being proposed is estimated to cost about $104,000. It has not been
determined at this time how this proposed study will be paid for or by whom.
Next Steps
The following schedule has been prepared as a guide in this proposed study:
April 1, 2009 Agencies’ letter to SLP and Reilly (Vertellus)
requesting the vapor intrusion study.
May 29, 2009 Preliminary telephone conference with Agencies to
discuss project scope.
July 13, 2009 Kickoff meeting in St. Louis Park to organize
project team and plan the proposed study.
July through August 2009
Create a public outreach plan similar in nature to
the one used for the Elmwood community VOC
study.
August 3, 2009 Submit Quality Assurance Project Plan and
Sampling and Analysis Plan to Agencies.
October 3, 2009 Work Plan Approval by Agencies.
October through November
2009
Implement the public outreach plan to gain access
for coring and sampling inside the residential
properties.
December 2009 through
February 2010
Collect soil gas samples during the most convenient
time period for the residents.
March 2010 Receive the laboratory analytical data.
April through May 2010 Evaluate vapor intrusion risks and prepare public
report for submittal to the Agencies.
June 2010 Letters to residents explaining results and any
follow-up needed.
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No. 12) Page 5
Subject: Reilly Site – Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study
As can be seen from the schedule above, a draft study plan will be submitted to the agencies on or
about August 3rd. In conjunction with the development of this plan, city staff is developing an
outreach plan to inform affected residents / property owners. Staff will provide Council a copy of
the outreach plan when it becomes available which will be in the very near future.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The total estimated cost of this study could well exceed $100,000. The agencies stance is Vertellus
and the city are the responsible parties in this case. As stated above, it has not yet been determined
how this proposed study will be paid for or by whom. Finally, it needs to be mentioned that should
study results indicate a vapor intrusion problem, mitigation measures may be necessary at additional
unknown costs.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This study is being requested by the agencies to ensure there are no soil gas vapor intrusion concerns
associated with the residential properties on the Reilly Site. This proposed study generally aligns
with the following Council adopted vision Strategic Direction:
St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. We
will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
Focus (in this case) would be on:
• Educating staff and the public on environmental consciousness,
stewardship and best practices.
• Preserving, enhancing and providing good stewardship of our parks.
Attachments: Agency letter of April 1, 2009
Prepared by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of May 10, 2010 (Item No.12)
Subject: Reilly Site - Proposed Soil Vapor Gas Study Page 6