Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/11/02 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA NOVEMBER 2, 2009 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7:00 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION MEETING – Council Chambers Discussion Items 1. 6:45 p.m. Sign Ordinance Amendment for Electronic Signs (with Attorney Tom Scott) 7:25 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Council Chambers 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes October 19, 2009 4. Approval of Agenda 5. Reports 5a. Economic Development Authority Vendor Claims 6. Old Business 7. New Business 7a. Purchase Agreement for 3924 Excelsior Boulevard (former American Inn property) Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving Purchase Agreement between Gary T. Mulcahy, Sr. and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (EDA) for 3924 Excelsior Boulevard and authorize the President and Executive Director to execute the documents necessary to complete the real estate transaction. Motion to provide staff authorization to enter the subject property into the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) Voluntary Investigation & Clean-Up (VIC) Program. Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing an internal loan for advance of funds in connection with acquisition of certain property within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (Ellipse on Excelsior TIF District). 8. Communications 9. Adjournment Meeting of November 2, 2009 City Council Agenda 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers 1. Call to Order 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 2a. St. Louis Park Lions Club Community Appreciation Award 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Study Session Minutes of October 12, 2009 3b. Joint Meeting Minutes of the city Council and School Board October 19, 2009 3c. City Council Minutes October 19, 2009 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the agenda as presented and to approve items on the consent calendar. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, motion to move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion and to approve those items remaining on the consent calendar.) 5. Boards and Commissions -- None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Assessment of Delinquent Utilities, False Alarms, Mowing, Tree Removal/Injection, and Other Miscellaneous Charges Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Levying Assessment and Reassessment for Delinquent Utility Accounts, False Alarm, Mowing, Tree Removal/Injection, and Other Miscellaneous Charges. 6b. On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License with Sunday Sales – El GordoUno, Inc. Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to consider on-sale intoxicating liquor license with Sunday sales to El GordoUno, Inc. dba El Gordo Mexican Restaurant located at 8140 Highway 7 for the license term through March 1, 2010. Meeting of November 2, 2009 City Council Agenda If the Council decides to deny the application the motion should be to direct the city attorney to prepare written findings and decision denying the application for consideration at the November 16 council meeting. 6c. Consolidated Public Hearing (1) 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. (2) 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2 Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. (3) 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3 Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. (4) 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4 Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. (5) 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5 Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. (6) 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6 Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public Meeting of November 2, 2009 City Council Agenda 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. El Gordo’s Restaurant --- Conditional Use Permit to operate a restaurant with intoxicating liquor Recommended Action: Motion to adopt Resolution Granting Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-194(d)(4) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Relating to Zoning to Permit a Restaurant with Intoxicating Liquor for Property Zoned C-2 General Commercial and Located at 8140 State Highway #7. 8b. CSM / BPG Properties – Hotel Proposal Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution Giving Approval for Preliminary Plat of MetroPoint with Variances from Subdivision Ordinance for Sidewalk Easement. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to Zoning for Property Zoned O-Office located at 600 Highway 169. 9. Communication Meeting of November 2, 2009 City Council Agenda 4. CONSENT CALENDAR 4a. Adopt Second Reading of Ordinance adopting fees for 2010 as outlined in Appendix A of the City Code of Ordinances, approve summary, and authorize publication 4b. Authorize the Execution of a Contract with Qwest Communications to Upgrade the 911 Emergency Communications System for an Amount not to exceed $271,574.00 4c. Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment to J. Carlson & Son’s in the amount of $5,635.38 for City Hall Exterior Renovation Project No. 2008-2700, Contract No. 100-08 4d. Adopt Resolution ratifying the publication of a notice of public hearing and establishing the date for a public hearing regarding the issuance of health care facilities revenue refunding bonds under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1651, as amended 4e. Approve for Filing Vendor Claims 4f. Approve for Filing Human Rights Commission Minutes September 15, 2009 4g. Approve for Filing Planning Commission Minutes October 7, 2009 4h. Approve for Filing Charter Commission 2008 Annual Report 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. Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 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: Sign Ordinance Amendment for Electronic Signs. RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action required. It is proposed the City Council and staff/City Attorney discuss the proposed sign ordinance amendment, and the process for notifying electronic sign owners of the proposed changes. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Should the city adopt ordinances to regulate the use of electronic signs? BACKGROUND: A written report was submitted to the Council’s September 29, 2009 study session. At that meeting, members of the Council asked that electronic signs be discussed at an upcoming study session. It was also asked that the City Attorney be present at that meeting to answer questions about the draft ordinance. Staff Review: Electronic sign technology is constantly changing thereby making available to property owners new methods of displaying information and graphics, including various ways to create multiple color displays, video streamlining, and electronic special effects. While the new technology presents more efficient and effective methods of advertising for commercial and industrial land owners, if left unregulated, electronic signs can be a nuisance and a distraction to motorists and residents. In reviewing the existing ordinance staff looked at the size and use of existing electronic signs in St. Louis Park, MnDOT recommendations, sign industry recommendations, and ordinances and research conducted by other cities. Staff also worked very closely with the City Attorney regarding issues pertaining to non-conformities, applicability to billboards, freedom of speech and miscellaneous issues typically encountered with proposed ordinance amendments. In a study session on August 19, 2009, the Planning Commission reviewed the existing zoning ordinance pertaining to signs and the attached draft amendment. The conclusion was that existing regulations do not adequately address electronic signs, and that the proposed amendment would address potential nuisances and safety concerns raised by electronic signs. The Commission reviewed several aspects of the draft ordinance. The majority of the discussion focused on the minimum amount of time a message must be displayed before switching to another message. The Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 1) Page 2 majority of the Commission agreed to the three second minimum display as proposed by staff, while one commissioner proposed a longer period of one minute. Current Zoning Regulations: The existing zoning ordinance doesn’t prohibit electronic signs; however, it only regulates a level of technology consistent with reader boards that are limited to a level of technology consistent with one color and a limited range of perceived motion, such as scrolling and flashing. Existing regulations do not address the sophisticated level of technology now available with electronic signage. It doesn’t adequately control them to ensure that they are not distracting or dangerous to motorists or residents. The existing language needs to be clarified and strengthened to address current technology. Proposed changes to zoning ordinance: Highlights that need to be addressed by a proposed amendment include: • Create an electronic sign definition that encompasses all manners of current and anticipated technology. Our current definition and standards for “changing signs” are really designed to address mechanically moving signs and flashing lights, not digitally controlled technology. • Expanding the prohibited sign list so that all aspects of perceived and actual movement are controlled. Messages would be required to be static, and to instantaneously change from one message. Special effects such as scrolling, fading, spinning, exploding, etc would not be allowed. • Updating the brightness standards so that electronic signs will not exceed the brightness levels of a standard back lit sign during the day and night. Adjustment in brightness are automatically made by built in daylight/night time sensors. • Adding a performance section for electronic signs that outlines the limitations for them. • Establish maximum size limits for electronic signs. Staff is proposing a maximum of 20 square feet in residential districts and a maximum of 40 square feet in all other districts. • Require the performance standards to be applied retroactively to all existing electronic signs. The City cannot require the size of existing electronic signs to come into compliance with newly adopted regulations; however, the City can require the manner in which the sign is used to comply with the new ordinance. For example, if an existing sign is changing messages every two seconds, the new ordinance can require the message to be displayed for at least three seconds. • Frequency of message change. The performance standards need to include a requirement that a message be displayed for a minimum time. When considering a minimum time limit, the City needs to consider many issues including safety and nuisance impacts and the interests of the sign owner has in conveying a message. Staff is proposing three seconds after reviewing data from MNDOT, the sign industry and other cities. Staff also conducted a survey of existing signs in St. Louis Park, noting their size, length of time the message is displayed, use of animation (scrolling, flashing etc.) and the zoning district in which the sign is located. The resulting data was assembled in the attached spreadsheet. Staff is recommending three seconds because: Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 1) Page 3 o There are no records of car accidents or other safety concerns attributed to a three second display. o There are no records of complaints received when messages are displayed for three or more seconds. The City has received complaints when messages are displayed less than three seconds. o Three seconds provides sufficient time for a message that requires two screens to be seen by typical motorists traveling a 30 mph speed limit. • The non-conforming sign section of the ordinance would be clarified to specifically state electronic signs are not allowed on billboards. Next Step: If the City Council agrees, staff will move forward by notifying all property owners currently utilizing electronic signage of the proposed changes, and invite them to review the draft electronic sign rules with staff. After sufficient notice and comment period, staff will present the draft and comments received to the Planning Commission at a public hearing, consider whether any changes should be made to the draft ordinance based on public and property owner input; and bring a final draft ordinance to the Council for a first and second hearing before the City Council. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. Attachments: Draft Ordinance Table of existing electronic signs in St. Louis Park Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 1) Page 4 Sec. 36-362. Sign regulations. (b) Findings. The city finds that: (7) Electronic signs, including video display signs, are highly visible from long distances and at very wide viewing angles both day and night and are designed to catch the eye of persons in their vicinity and hold it for extended periods of time. If left uncontrolled, electronic signs, including video display signs, are highly distracting to drivers and driver distraction continues to be a significant underlying cause of traffic accidents. (c) Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Sign, changing means a sign whose message can be readily changed, either by manual or automatic means. Sign, Electronic - any characteristic of a sign that appears to have movement or that appears to change, caused by any method other than physically removing and replacing the sign or its components, whether the apparent movement or change is in the display, the sign structure, or any other component of the sign. This includes any rotating, revolving, moving, flashing, blinking, or animated display and any display that incorporates rotating panels, LED lights manipulated through digital input, digital ink or any other method or technology that allows the sign face to present a series of images, displays or video. Sign, flashing means any illuminated sign, which is not a changing sign which emits an intermittent or flashing light, or creates the illusion of intermittent or flashing light by means of animation. Sign, rotating means a sign or a portion of a sign which moves in a rotating, oscillating or similar manner other than changing signs. (e) Prohibited signs. The following signs are prohibited in all use districts: (1) Flashing signs. (2) Signs on or over the public rights-of-way unless the city council grants permission for a temporary sign on or over the public rights-of-way for a period of time not to exceed ten days. (3) Searchlights, beacons, strobe lights or other illuminated signs emitting a beam consisting of a collection or concentration of rays of light. (4) Rooftop signs. (5) Rotating signs. (6) Billboards. (7) Off-premises signs. (8) Inflatable signs and tethered balloons. (9) Signs painted directly on a building. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 1) Page 5 (10) Signs mounted on chimneys, rooftop equipment, observation towers, flagpoles, cooling towers, elevator penthouses, commercial antennas, communication towers, belfries, church spires and cupolas. (11) Signs, including the sign structure or any other component of the sign, that rotate, revolve, scroll, move, flash, blink, fade, or are animated. (12) Electronic signs that change complete messages or displays in any manner that is not instantaneous. (f) General provisions. Subject to the following regulations, signs are a permitted accessory use in all use districts: (6) Lighting. All signs must meet the following standards: a. Direct rays or glare of light from an externally illuminated sign shall not be visible from public rights-of-way or property other than that on which the illuminated sign is located. Any external source of illumination must be provided with shields or lenses which concentrate the light onto the sign. b. Brightness Standards: 1. The sign cannot be brighter than is necessary for clear and adequate visibility. 2. The sign cannot be of such intensity or brilliance as to impair the vision of a motor vehicle driver with average eyesight or to otherwise interfere with the driver's operation of a motor vehicle. 3. The sign cannot be of such intensity or brilliance that it interferes with the effectiveness of an official traffic sign, device or signal. 4. The sign cannot exceed a maximum illumination of 5000 nits (candelas per square meter) during daylight hours and a maximum illumination of 500 nits (candelas per square meter) between dusk to dawn as measured from the sign’s face; c) The person owning or controlling the sign must adjust the sign to meet the brightness standards in accordance with the city's instructions. The adjustment must be made immediately upon notice of non-compliance from the city. d) All signs that will have illumination by a means other than natural light must be equipped with a mechanism that automatically adjusts the brightness in response to ambient conditions. These signs must also be equipped with a means to immediately turn off the display or lighting if it malfunctions, and the sign owner or operator must immediately turn off the sign or lighting when notified by the city that it is not complying with the standards in this section. (h) Special provisions. In addition to the general provisions contained in subsection (f) of this section, these special provisions apply to the following types of signs: (8) Electronic signs. Electronic signs are allowed subject to the following conditions: a. The sign face shall not exceed: Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 1) Page 6 1. 20 square feet in a residential district and the Park and Open Space District. 2. 40 square feet in all other districts. b. The maximum sign face established above shall not be in excess of the maximum sign area allowed in table36-362A. c. No more than one sign face may be visible from any off-site location. d. Messages and/or images must be displayed for at least three seconds. e. Electronic signs existing on **(effective date of this ordinance)** must comply with this section, except that electronic signs that exceed the maximum size limit above may continue as a non-conforming sign. (i) Nonconforming signs. (5) Billboards. a. Any billboard in existence as of the date of the ordinance from which this section is derived was adopted may remain in place if it is not increased in sign area or height and is maintained in conformance with the general provisions of this chapter. The following are not permitted on billboards: 1. Flashing signs. 2. Changing Electronic signs, unless they are limited to a display of either time, temperature or stock market indices. b. The maximum height of a billboard shall be 35 feet, including extensions, measured as required by subsection (c) of this section. c. Billboards which have been destroyed or damaged must be removed when the cost of repair equals more than 50 percent of the appraised physical value of the structure. Sign Location Height Width Sign faceNumber of sign facesDisplay Color% of allowed sign area% of allowed sign facechange Frequency AAA5' 10' 50sf 2 Red100/500=20%50/300=17%2 secondsAARCEE4' 10' 40sf 2 Multi Color80/250=32%40/150=27%Scrolling & flashingLenox8" 5' 3.5sf2 Redn/a*3.5/60=6%1 secondSLP Evangelical Free 2' 7' 14' 2 Redn/a*14/60=23.3%2 secondsTimothy Lutheran 2'8" 4' 11sf 2 Redn/a*11/60=18%2 secondsDistinctive Dentistry2' 10' 20sf1 Red20/200=10%20/100=20%2 secondsAlaska Eatery15" 8'4" 10.5sf2 Red21/300=7%10.5/150=7%2 secondsAssociated Bank 4' 18' 72sf 1 Red72/500=14%72/300=24%1-2 seconds & scrollingBenilde SM3' 6' 18sf 2 Redn/a*18/60=30%3 seconds & scrollingWolfe Lake1' 5' 5sf 4 Red20/300=6.7%10/150=6.7%1/2 seconds & scrollingTCF Bank18" 5' 7.5sf3 Red22.5/300=7.5%7.5/150=5%3 secondsHoliday (Mtka Blvd) 18" 4' 6sf2 Red12/250=4.8%6/150=4%StationaryMarathon (Mtka Blvd) (2 signs per face)8" 8" 4' 4'2.7sf, 2.7sf2 Red10.8/150=7.5%5.4/100=5.4%StationaryMobile (Excelsior) (2 signs per face)18" 12"4' 32" 6sf, 2.7sf2 Red17.4/250=6.9%8.7/150=5.8%StationarySA (Excelsior) 14" 3' 3.5sf 2 Red7/200=3.5%3.5/100=3.5%StationaryHoliday (Hwy 7)3.5' 7' 24.5sf 2 Red49/200=24.5%24.5/100=24.5%StationaryJewish Community Center6" 7' 3.5sf 1 Redn/a*3.5/40=8.7%1 second & scrollingKnollwood Liquor2' 8' 16sf 1 Red16/250=6.4%16/150=10.7%Illegible* Sign ordinance does not have a maximum sign area. All regulations for signs for this use pertain to maximum sign face.Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 1) Page 7 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 19, 2009 1. Call to Order President Finkelstein called the meeting to order at 7:25 p.m. Commissioners present: President Finkelstein, John Basill, C. Paul Carver, Jeff Jacobs, Paul Omodt and Loran Paprocki. Commissioners absent: Susan Sanger. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes). 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Economic Development Authority Minutes September 8, 2009 It was moved by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carver, to approve the EDA minutes as presented. The motion passed 6-0. 4. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as presented. 5. Reports 5a. Economic Development Authority Vendor Claims It was moved by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Carver, to approve the EDA Vendor Claims. The motion passed 6-0. 6. Old Business – None Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 3a) Page 2 7. New Business 7a. Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Proposed Modification of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District. EDA Resolution No. 09-14 Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and stated that the Elmwood Village TIF District is a funding vehicle that has made the Village in the Park and Hoigaard Village redevelopment projects possible; it is also a critical funding source for construction of the new Highway 7/Wooddale Avenue interchange. He explained that special legislation was passed earlier this year to allow the City’s EDA to extend the term of the TIF District by seven years, from 2022 to 2029, and reflects adjusted revenues and expenses within the TIF Plan budget. He added the proposed modification facilitates both private and public improvements as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan as well as that contemplated in the area land use study. It was moved by Commissioner Basill, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs, to adopt EDA Resolution No. 09-14 approving a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1, and adopting a Modified Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District Therefor. The motion passed 6-0. 8. Communications – None 9. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:28 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Secretary President Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 5a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Vendor Claims Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Vendor Claims. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Accept for Filing Vendor Claims for the period October 17 through October 30, 2009. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: The Finance Department prepares this report for council’s review. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: Vendor Claims Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:37:33R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 1Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 531.50BASS LAKE/EDI ENVIRONMENT ANALYSISAECOM INC 531.50 494.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A TRAININGCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK 34.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MEETING EXPENSE 528.00 19,125.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCREATIVE NERVE INC 19,125.00 1,309.20BASS LAKE/EDI OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESINDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO 1,309.20 185.02DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A TELEPHONENEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 185.02 16.01DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT 16.01 2,641.73TRUNK HWY 7 G&A ARBITRAGE REBATEUNITED STATES TREASURY 2,641.73 Report Totals 24,336.46 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 5a)Page 2 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 7a 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: Purchase Agreement for 3924 Excelsior Boulevard (former American Inn property). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving Purchase Agreement between Gary T. Mulcahy, Sr. and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (EDA) for 3924 Excelsior Boulevard and authorize the President and Executive Director to execute the documents necessary to complete the real estate transaction. Motion to provide staff authorization to enter the subject property into the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) Voluntary Investigation & Clean-Up (VIC) Program. Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing an internal loan for advance of funds in connection with acquisition of certain property within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (Ellipse on Excelsior TIF District). POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA desire to acquire the property at 3924 Excelsior Boulevard (former American Inn property) pursuant to the terms of the proposed purchase agreement? BACKGROUND: At the October 26th Study Session, staff provided an update on the environmental conditions and the purchase agreement related to the subject property. Upon discussion, it was the consensus of the EDA that acquisition of the subject property should be pursued. What are the environmental conditions on the property? The environmental conditions of the subject property were detailed in the October 26th staff report. In sum, • Approximately 11,000 cubic yards of fill soils at the Site are impacted by diesel range organics (DRO), and various polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) compounds at concentrations above both residential and industrial cleanup levels as defined by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 2 • The native soils underlying the fill at the Site are also impacted by PAHs, DRO and various petroleum related volatile organic compounds (VOCs) at concentrations that exceed applicable cleanup standards. These impacts are likely the result of the former gasoline station that was located at the Site. While the full extent of these contaminated soils is not yet defined, it is estimated that there are approximately 3,000 cubic yards of petroleum contaminated soil that will require removal and off- Site treatment or disposal in the future. As with other impacted properties the EDA has acquired, the EDA would enter the subject property into the MPCA’s Voluntary Investigation and Clean-up Program (VIC) in order to obtain a “no association determination letter” separating the EDA from any responsibility for the environmental problems present on the site. What is the estimated cost to remediate the property? As detailed in the previous staff report, the cost to abate the restricted wastes in the building, demolish it, and properly correct the soil on the property is estimated at approximately $1,024,500. Why purchase the subject property? The area of the subject property has been identified for potential redevelopment in the city’s plans for some time. Owning the subject property provides the EDA with the ultimate ability to control the future of the site and insure that its redevelopment is consistent with the France Avenue and Excelsior Boulevard Development Guidelines. Purchasing the subject property now would be a strategic move that precludes an undesirable interim use of the property and affords the EDA the opportunity to have it redeveloped to its highest and best use sooner rather than later. Leaving matters entirely to the private sector (in this particular case) may not result in the property’s optimal usage. Residents from the surrounding Minikahda Oaks and Minikahda Vista neighborhoods have expressed considerable interest in seeing the former motel building removed and redeveloped in a manner consistent with the France Avenue and Excelsior Boulevard Development Guidelines. Purchasing and clearing the former motel prevents the building from falling into further disrepair and becoming a potentially blighting influence on the adjacent neighborhoods. The subject property is situated near the highly regarded Excelsior Boulevard/France Ave intersection, next door to what will be an attractive new mixed use development, and is surrounded by strong neighborhoods. What are the proposed plans for the subject property? Given the findings of the environmental investigation, the EDA will seek to demolish the building (so as to avoid it becoming an attractive nuisance) but keep the parking lot in place as a cap over the Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 3 contaminated soils. The EDA would then market the property to prospective redevelopers. The EDA would seek a reputable and experienced redeveloper with a development plan consistent with France Avenue and Excelsior Boulevard Development Guidelines and acceptable to the community. The parties would then enter into a property purchase and redevelopment contract in which the redeveloper would assume responsibility for the proper clean up of the property. Such an agreement would likely require some TIF assistance. Staff envisions the property to ultimately be redeveloped as a mixed use building with underground structured parking. What is the purchase price? The purchase price for the subject property is $750,000. How was the purchase price determined? The current assessed value of the subject property is $950,000. It is assessed as a redevelopment site with the building having negligible value. Staff retained Patchin Messner & Dodd (who prepared a Limited Market Appraisal on the subject property back in April 2005) to assemble a Comparable Land Sales Summary to confirm recent selling prices of similar properties in Minneapolis and first ring suburbs. This summary confirmed that the proposed property price was within market. In light of the property’s environmental conditions, the property owner expressed a willingness to reduce the property purchase price by $200,000 (to $750,000) if a sale closing could occur by November 20th. How would the property acquisition and ancillary costs be funded? Purchase of the subject property would be paid for through the Development Fund. The Development Fund would be reimbursed upon resale to a future redeveloper. Costs related to the environmental investigation, building demolition, restrictive waste removal, as well as site stabilization would also be paid for through the Development Fund. Since these expenses are all TIF eligible, the Development Fund could be reimbursed from the Ellipse on Excelsior TIF District as tax increment becomes available. This would require approval of the proposed Interfund Loan resolution. As noted above, remediating the subject site will likely require some TIF assistance. The site is already in the existing Ellipse on Excelsior TIF District. Grant assistance from other public agencies is another potential source to help fund remediation of the site. The remediation work needed for this site is consistent with the activities typically funded by grant programs from the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County. Between those funds and the availability of tax increment from the subject property as well as the Ellipse project (if need be) there should be sufficient financial resources to address the extraordinary costs facing the subject property. Purchase Agreement Terms The following is a brief summary of the pertinent terms of the proposed Purchase Agreement between Gary T. Mulcahy Sr. (“Seller”) and the EDA (“Buyer”). Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 4 Purchase Price: The total Purchase Price for the Property is $750,000.00. Terms: 1. Earnest Money. The sum of One Dollar ($1.00) Earnest Money shall be paid by the Buyer to the Seller. 2. Balance Due Seller: Buyer agrees to pay by check or wire transfer on the Closing Date the remaining Balance Due. 3. Deed/Marketable Title: Subject to performance by Buyer, Seller agrees to deliver a Warranty Deed conveying marketable title to the Property to Buyer. Contingencies. Buyer's obligation to buy is contingent upon the following: 1. Buyer's determination of marketable title. 2. Seller’s procurement of a Certificate of Property Maintenance from the City of St. Louis Park’s Inspections Department prior to Closing. Title Examinations/Curing Title Defects: Buyer shall, at its expense, obtain a commitment for title insurance (“Commitment”) for the Property. Buyer shall have ten (10) business days after receipt of the later of the commitment and executed Purchase Agreement to examine the same and to deliver written objections to title, if any, to Seller. Seller shall have until the Closing Date (or such later date as the parties may agree upon) to make title marketable, at the Seller’s cost. In the event that title to the Property cannot be made marketable or is not made marketable by the Seller by the Closing Date, then, the Purchase Agreement may be terminated at the option of the Buyer. Environmental Investigation. Except for the conditions and information contained in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report (“Phase I”) and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Report (“Phase II”), Seller warrants that: 1. The Property has not been used for production, storage, deposit or disposal of any toxic or hazardous waste or substance, petroleum product or asbestos product during the period of time the Seller has owned the Property. 2. That Seller has no knowledge of any environmental release, investigation, cleanup or closure relating to the Property. Purchase “As Is”. Except as expressly represented, warranted and covenanted by Seller, Buyer accepts the Property in an “as-is,” “where is” condition, with all the faults, defects and deficiencies, including the Property’s environmental and geotechnical condition. In addition, Buyer waives all rights to bring claims or other actions against Seller for contribution(s), liability, indemnity, or damages arising under any federal, state or local law relating to environmental, health, or safety matters, recognizing that Seller is only a conduit with respect to the Property and has undertaken no activities of its own with respect to it. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 5 Real Estate Taxes and Special Assessments. Seller shall pay all real estate taxes, interest and penalties relating to the Property for the years prior to the year of closing. Buyer agrees to pay taxes for the year following the year of closing (2010) and all taxes for years thereafter. Seller and buyer shall prorate all taxes for the year of closing (2009) based on the Closing Date. Seller shall pay all special assessments regarding the Property which are levied or pending as of the Closing Date. Closing Date. The date of closing will be on or before November 20, 2009. Possession. The Seller agrees to deliver possession of the Property free of all personal property, junk and debris to Buyer not later than the Closing Date. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The EDA is requested to consider the acquisition of 3924 Excelsior Blvd. for $750,000. The EDA would incur additional costs related to building demolition as well as site stabilization and maintenance until a suitable buyer is found to properly cleanup the property and redevelop it along the lines envisioned by the city. The source of funding for this purchase is the Development Fund. 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: Resolution authorizing Purchase Agreement Resolution approving Interfund Loan Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director & City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 6 ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDA RESOLUTION NO. 09-___ RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN GARY T. MULCAHY, SR. AND THE ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BE IT RESOLVED By the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority ("Authority") as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Authority has determined a need to exercise the powers of a housing and redevelopment authority, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections. 469.090 to 469.108 ("EDA Act"), and is currently administering Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Redevelopment Project") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 ("HRA Act"). 1.02. Among the activities to be assisted by the Authority in the Redevelopment Project is redevelopment of certain underutilized property in the City located at 3924 Excelsior Blvd. and legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (“Property”). 1.03. There has been presented before the Board a Purchase Agreement (“Agreement”) setting forth the terms and conditions of the purchase of the Property between the Authority and the Seller of the Property, Gary T. Mulcahy, Sr. (“Seller”). The Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit B. 1.04. The Board has reviewed the Agreement and finds that the execution thereof and performance of the Authority's obligations thereunder are in the best interest of the City and its residents. Section 2. Authority Approval; Further Proceedings. 2.01. The Agreement as presented to the Board is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President and Executive Director, provided that execution of the documents by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval. 2.02. The President and Executive Director are hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the Authority the Agreement and any documents referenced therein requiring execution by the Authority, and to carry out, on behalf of the Authority its obligations thereunder. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 7 Approved by the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority this 2nd day of November, 2009. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority November 2, 2009 Executive Director President Attest Secretary Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 8 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, described as commencing at the intersection of the Southwesterly line of the plat of “Minikahda Oaks, Hennepin County, Minnesota” with a line drawn parallel with and 50 feet Northwesterly from the centerline of Excelsior Ave., as delineated on said plat; thence Southwesterly parallel with said centerline and its Southwesterly extension 170 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Southwesterly along said parallel line 166.30 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles 190 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 166.30 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles to the point of beginning. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 9 EXHIBIT B Purchase Agreement PURCHASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made as of this day of November ___, 2009, by and between Gary T. Mulcahy, Sr., ("Seller") and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota (“Buyer”). 1. PROPERTY. Seller is the owner of property located at 3924 Excelsior Blvd., in the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, which is legally described on the attached Exhibit A ("Property"). 2. OFFER/ACCEPTANCE. In consideration of and subject to the terms and provisions of this agreement, Buyer offers and agrees to purchase and Seller agrees to sell and hereby grants to Buyer the exclusive right to purchase the Property and all improvements thereon., together with all appurtenances. All fixtures located on the Property on the date of this Agreement is included in the purchase of the Property. 3. PURCHASE PRICE FOR PROPERTY AND TERMS. a. PURCHASE PRICE: The total Purchase Price for the Property is Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand and 00/100ths Dollars ($750,000.00). b. TERMS: (1): EARNEST MONEY. The sum of One Dollar ($1.00) Earnest Money shall be paid by the Buyer to the Seller. (2): BALANCE DUE SELLER: Buyer agrees to pay by check or wire transfer on the Closing Date any remaining Balance Due according to the terms of this Purchase Agreement. (3): DEED/MARKETABLE TITLE: Subject to performance by Buyer, Seller agrees to execute and deliver a Warranty Deed conveying marketable title to the Property to Buyer, subject only to the following exceptions: a. Building and zoning laws, ordinances, state and federal regulations. b. Reservation of minerals or mineral rights to the State of Minnesota, if any. c. Public utility and drainage easements of record which will not interfere with Buyer’s intended use of the Property. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 10 . DOCUMENTS TO BE DELIVERED AT CLOSING BY SELLER. In addition to the Warranty Deed required at paragraph 3B(3) above, Seller shall deliver to the Buyer: a. Standard form Affidavit of Seller. b. A “bring-down” certificate, certifying that all of the warranties made by Sellers in this Purchase Agreement remain true as of the Closing Date. c. Certificate that Seller is not a foreign national. d. Well disclosure certification, if required, or, if there is no well on the Property, the Warranty Deed given pursuant to paragraph 3B(3) above must include the following statement: “The Seller certifies that the Seller does not know of any wells on the described real property.” e. Any other documents reasonably required by Buyer’s title insurance company or attorney to evidence that title to the Property is marketable and that Seller has complied with the terms of this Purchase Agreement. f. Documentation of any environmental investigations, releases, remediation or removal of storage tanks. 5. CONTINGENCIES. Buyer's obligation to buy is contingent upon the following: a. Buyer's determination of marketable title pursuant to paragraph 6 of this Agreement. b. Seller’s procurement of a Certificate of Property Maintenance from the City of St. Louis Park’s Inspections Department prior to Closing. Buyer shall have until the Closing Date to remove the foregoing contingencies. These contingencies are solely for the benefit of Buyer and may be waived by Buyer. If Buyer or its attorney gives written notice to Seller that all contingencies are duly satisfied or waived, the Buyer and Seller shall proceed to close the transaction as contemplated herein. If Buyer’s contingency is not satisfied, or is not satisfied on time, and is not waived, this Purchase Agreement shall thereupon be void at the written option of Buyer, and Seller shall return the Earnest Money to Buyer, and Buyer and Seller shall execute and deliver to each other documentation effecting the termination of this Purchase Agreement. As a contingent Purchase Agreement, the termination of this Agreement is not required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 559.21, et. seq. 6. TITLE EXAMINATION/CURING TITLE DEFECTS. Buyer shall, at its expense and within a reasonable time after Seller's acceptance of this Agreement, obtain a commitment for title insurance (“Commitment”) for the Property. Buyer shall have ten (10) business days after receipt of the later of the commitment and executed Purchase Agreement to examine the same and to deliver written objections to title, if any, to Seller, or Buyer’s right to do so shall be deemed Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 11 waived. Seller shall have until the Closing Date (or such later date as the parties may agree upon) to make title marketable, at the Seller’s cost. In the event that title to the Property cannot be made marketable or is not made marketable by the Seller by the Closing Date, then, this Agreement may be terminated at the option of the Buyer. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION. Buyer acknowledges that it has been authorized by Seller to enter the Property and conduct an environmental investigation and assessment of the Property. An environmental/assessment has been performed to Buyer’s satisfaction. Except for the conditions and information set forth in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report dated September 15, 2009 (“Phase I”) and Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Report dated October 12, 2009 (“Phase II”) both prepared by AMEC Geomatrix, Inc., Seller warrants that: (i) The Property has not been used for production, storage, deposit or disposal of any toxic or hazardous waste or substance, petroleum product or asbestos product during the period of time the Seller has owned the Property. (ii) The Seller has no knowledge or information of any fact which would indicate the Property was used for production, storage, deposit or disposal of any toxic or hazardous waste or substance, petroleum product or asbestos product prior to the date the Seller purchased the Property. (iii) That Seller has no knowledge of any environmental release, investigation, cleanup or closure relating to the Property. 8. PURCHASE “AS IS”. Except as expressly represented, warranted and covenanted by Seller herein, Buyer accepts the Property in an “as-is,” “where is” condition, with all the faults, defects and deficiencies, including the Property’s environmental and geotechnical condition. In addition, Buyer hereby waives any and all rights to bring claims or other actions against Seller for contribution(s), liability, indemnity, reimbursement or damages arising under any federal, state or local law (including without limitation the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 USC § 9601 et seq., and the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act, Minn. Stat. § 115B.01 et. seq.) relating to environmental, health, or safety matters, or under the common law, recognizing that Seller is only a conduit with respect to the Property and has undertaken no activities of its own with respect to it. This “as is” provision shall be restated in the Limited Warranty Deed and shall be binding upon Buyer’s successors and assigns. 9. REAL ESTATE TAXES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Seller shall pay all real estate taxes, interest and penalties, if any, relating to the Property for the years prior to the year of closing. Provided that this transaction shall close as provided herein, Buyer agrees to pay taxes for the year following the year of closing and all taxes for years thereafter. Seller and buyer shall prorate all taxes for the year of closing based on the Closing Date. Seller shall pay all special assessments regarding the Property which are levied or pending as of the Closing Date, including portions which would otherwise have been payable in future installments. 10. CLOSING DATE. The date of closing will be on or before November 20, 2009 (“Closing Date”). Delivery of all papers and the closing shall be made at the offices of Buyer, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 or at such other location as is mutually agreed upon by the parties. All deliveries and notices to Buyer shall be made as provided in Section 17 of this Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 12 Agreement. If closing is not completed by November 20, Buyer shall have the option of terminating this Agreement. 11. POSSESSION/UTILITIES. a. Possession. The Seller agrees to deliver possession of the Property free of all personal property, junk and debris to Buyer not later than the Closing Date. b. Utilities. Seller shall pay all utility charges, if any, prior to the Closing Date. 12. SELLER WARRANTIES. a. Sewer and water. Seller warrants that the Property is connected to City sewer and City water. b. Mechanics' Liens. Seller warrants that, prior to the closing, Seller shall pay in full all amounts due for labor, materials, machinery, fixtures or tools furnished within the 120 days immediately preceding the closing in connection with construction, alteration or repair of any structure upon or improvement to the Property. c. Notices. Seller warrants that it has not received any notice from any governmental authority as to violation of any law, ordinance or regulation in connection with the Property, except if any violations are noted in the Certificate of Property Maintenance. It is the Buyer’s intention to demolish the existing building and will be responsible for any items the City of St. Louis Park’s Inspections Department notes during the Certificate of Property Maintenance inspection process. d. Tenants. Seller warrants that the Property is not now occupied by tenants and was not occupied by tenants at the time the Seller first received the Buyer's written offer to purchase the Property. e. Broker Commission. Each party represents to the other that it has not utilized the services of any real estate broker or agent in connection with this Purchase Agreement or the transaction contemplated by this Purchase Agreement. Each party agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the other party against and in respect of any such obligation and liability based in any way upon agreements, arrangements, or understandings made or claimed to have been made by the party with any third person. 13. CLOSING COSTS/RECORDING FEES/DEED TAX. Buyer will pay: (a) the closing fees charged by the title insurance or other closing agent, if any, utilized to close the transaction contemplated by this Agreement; (b) the cost of the title commitment and the premium for title insurance policy, if any, obtained by Buyer; and (c) any transfer taxes and recording fees required to enable Buyer to record its deed from Seller under this Agreement. Seller will pay all other fees Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 13 normally paid by sellers and fees and charges related to the filing of any instrument required to make title marketable. Each party shall pay its own attorney fees. 14. INSPECTIONS. From the date of this Agreement to the Closing Date, Buyer, its employees and agents, shall be entitled to enter upon the Property to conduct such surveying, inspections, investigations, soil borings and testing, and drilling, monitoring, sampling and testing of groundwater monitoring wells, as Buyer shall elect. Buyer shall also be entitled to a general walkthrough inspection within five (5) days of the Closing Date. 15. RISK OF LOSS. It there is any loss or damage to the Property between the date hereof and the Closing Date, for any reason including fire, vandalism, flood, earthquake or act of God, the risk of loss shall be on the Seller. If the Property is destroyed or substantially damaged before the closing date, this Purchase Agreement shall become null and void, at the Buyer’s option. At the request of Buyer, Seller agrees to sign a cancellation of Purchase Agreement. 16. DEFAULT/REMEDIES. If the Buyer defaults in any of the covenants herein, the Seller may terminate this Purchase Agreement, and on such termination all payments made hereunder shall be retained by the Seller as liquidated damages, time being of the essence. This provision shall not deprive either party of the right to enforce specific performance of this Purchase Agreement, provided this Purchase Agreement has not terminated and action to enforce specific performance is commenced within six months after such right of action arises. Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph, each party retains all remedies at law or in equity with respect to any breach by the other party. 17. NOTICE. Any notice, demand, request or other communication which may or shall be given or served by the parties, shall be deemed to have been given or served on the date the same is personally served upon one of the following indicated recipients for notices or is deposited in the United States Mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: SELLER: Gary T. Mulcahy, Sr. c/o Charlie Traeger élan Consulting Services, LLC 3050 Echo Lake Blvd Mahtomedi, MN 55115 BUYER: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Attn: Tom Harmening 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 14 AGENT: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered ATTN: Joe Y. Yang and Catherine B. Rocklitz 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 18. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Purchase Agreement, including exhibits attached hereto, and any amendments hereto signed by the parties, shall constitute the entire Agreement between Seller and the Buyer and supersedes any other written or oral agreements between the parties relating to the Property. This Purchase Agreement can be modified only in a writing properly signed on behalf of Seller and the Buyer. 19. SURVIVAL. Notwithstanding any other provisions of law or court decision to the contrary, the provisions of this Purchase Agreement shall survive closing. (the remainder of this page intentionally left blank) Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 15 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement on the date and year above. Buyer: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority By: ________________________________ Its President By: ________________________________ Its Executive Director Seller: ________________________________ Gary T. Mulcahy, Sr. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 16 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, described as commencing at the intersection of the Southwesterly line of the plat of “Minikahda Oaks, Hennepin County, Minnesota” with a line drawn parallel with and 50 feet Northwesterly from the centerline of Excelsior Ave., as delineated on said plat; thence Southwesterly parallel with said centerline and its Southwesterly extension 170 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Southwesterly along said parallel line 166.30 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles 190 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 166.30 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles to the point of beginning. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 17 ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDA RESOLUTION NO. 09-___ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERNAL LOAN FOR ADVANCE OF FUNDS IN CONNECTION WITH ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN PROPERTY WITHIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 BE IT RESOLVED by the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Authority and City of St. Louis Park (“City”) have established the Ellipse on Excelsior Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF District") within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project"), and have adopted a tax increment financing plan (the “TIF Plan”) for the TIF District, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1799 (the “TIF Act”). 1.02. Under Section 469.178, subdivision 7 of the TIF Act, the Authority may incur certain costs related to the Project, which costs may be financed on a temporary basis from available Authority or City funds and repaid from certain tax increments. 1.03. The Authority intends to acquire certain property within the Project described on the attached Exhibit A (the “Property”). Upon acquisition of the Property, the City or the Authority may demolish the structure on the Property and/or resell it for redevelopment purposes. 1.04. The Authority intends to reimburse itself for a portion of the cost of acquisition of the Property, and the cost of demolition, environmental remediation, soil correction, and related soft costs (together, the “Qualified Costs”) from tax increments derived from the TIF District, in accordance with the terms of this resolution (which terms are referred to collectively as the “TIF Loan”). 1.05. The Authority has determined to specify the terms of the TIF Loan in more detail in this resolution. Section 2. Terms of TIF Loan. 2.01. The Authority shall repay, to the Authority fund from which the Qualified Costs are initially paid or advanced, the principal amount of funds advanced not to exceed $1,300,000 together with interest on the principal amount advanced, accruing from the date of each initial expenditure or advance, at the rate of 5% (except as otherwise described below). The maximum interest rate under Section 469.178, subd. 7of the TIF Act is the greater of (a) the rate specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or (b) the rate specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 549.09, in Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 18 effect for the calendar year in which the expenditure or advance is made. Advances related to the Property are expected to occur in 2009, when the maximum interest rate is 5%. The Authority selects 5% as the effective rate for all advances, unless advances are made in a subsequent calendar year or years when the statutory maximum is less than 5%, in which event the effective rate for advances in each such year is the maximum statutory rate for that year. 2.02. Principal and interest ("Payments") shall be paid semi-annually on each August 1 and February 1 (“Payment Dates”), commencing on the first Payment Date after the first advance of Qualified Costs and continuing through the earlier of (a) the date the principal and accrued interest of the TIF Loan is paid in full, or (b) the date of last receipt of tax increment from the TIF District. Payments will be made in the amount and only to the extent of Available Tax Increment as hereinafter defined. Payments shall be applied first to accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal. Interest accruing from the date of each expenditure to the first Payment Date shall be compounded semiannually on February 1 and August 1 of each year and added to principal, unless otherwise specified by the Executive Director. 2.03. Payments on this TIF Loan are payable solely from "Available Tax Increment," which shall mean, on each Payment Date, all of the tax increment (as defined in the TIF Act) generated in the preceding six (6) months with respect to the property within the TIF District, subject to the provisions of Section 2.04 hereof. 2.04. Payments on this TIF Loan are subordinate to any outstanding or future bonds, notes or obligations issued to developers or third parties and secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment (unless otherwise specified in the relevant outstanding or future instrument), and are on parity with any other outstanding or future interfund loans secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment. 2.05. The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this TIF Loan are pre-payable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular payment otherwise required to be made under this TIF Loan. 2.06. This TIF Loan is evidence of an internal borrowing by the Authority in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, subdivision 7, and is a limited obligation payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under this resolution. This TIF Loan and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the City. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this TIF Loan or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this TIF Loan or other costs incident hereto. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay any principal amount of the TIF Loan or accrued interest thereon, which may remain unpaid after the final Payment Date. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (EDA Item No. 7a) Page 19 2.07. The Authority may amend the terms of this TIF Loan at any time by resolution of the Board, including a determination to forgive the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest to the extent permissible under law. Section 3. Effective Date. This resolution is effective upon the date of its approval. Approved by the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority this 2nd day of November, 2009. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority November 2, 2009 Executive Director President Attest Secretary Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 7a) Page 20 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Property That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, described as commencing at the intersection of the Southwesterly line of the plat of “Minikahda Oaks, Hennepin County, Minnesota” with a line drawn parallel with and 50 feet Northwesterly from the centerline of Excelsior Ave., as delineated on said plat; thence Southwesterly parallel with said centerline and its Southwesterly extension 170 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence continuing Southwesterly along said parallel line 166.30 feet; thence Northwesterly at right angles 190 feet; thence Northeasterly at right angles 166.30 feet; thence Southeasterly at right angles to the point of beginning. Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 2a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: St. Louis Park Lions Club Community Appreciation Award. RECOMMENDED ACTION: None. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None. BACKGROUND: Vern Harjes, on behalf of the St. Louis Park Lions Club, will present to the City of St. Louis Park, their Community Appreciation Award. The City was nominated and chosen for this award at the St. Louis Park Lions Club Annual Awards banquet held on Tuesday, October 27. The St. Louis Park Lions Club is honoring The City of St. Louis Park for their ongoing support of the Lions Club’s now legendary 52nd Annual Pancake Breakfast, the Parktacular food stand and waffle breakfast, and the Fourth of July food activities. The City of St. Louis Park is one of two recipients receiving this award, the other being Cub Foods for their support in raising food and funds for St. Louis Park’s local foodshelf, STEP. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: None. Attachments: None Prepared by: Lisa Songle, Office Assistant Reviewed by: Manny Camilon, Environmental Health Specialist Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 12, 2009 The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Sue Sanger, C. Paul Carver, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt, and Loran Paprocki. Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jeff Jacobs and Councilmember Basill Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Police Chief (Mr. Luse), Finance Manager (Mr. Swanson), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Inspections Director (Mr. Hoffman), Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin), Human Resources Director (Ms. Gohman), Parks & Recreation Director (Ms. Walsh), Chief Information Officer (Mr. Pires), Fire Chief (Mr. Stemmer), Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Suciu). Guest: Jim Brimeyer, SWLRT Policy Advisory Representative 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – October 19 and October 26, 2009 Mr. Harmening presented the proposed study session agendas for October 19 and October 26, 2009. He reminded the City Council of the Monday, October 19 meeting with the School District regarding the facilities study they have undertaken and next steps. Mr. Harmening asked about a Study session with Three River Park District regarding regional trail crossings and added he would schedule a meeting with them if the City Council desired but would like to invite Hennepin County as well. The City Council discussed the need to meet with Three Rivers and the County in the near future. After discussion, Council asked that staff provide a written report summarizing past discussions and actions taken by Council regarding the regional trail crossings. 2. SWLRT Update Mr. Brimeyer, SWLRT Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) Representative, presented an update on the Southwest LRT (SWLRT), including timeline and upcoming actions with the City Council, which is estimated to take approximately two years. Construction will take three to four years and the expected earliest timeline for the SWLRT to be operational is 2015 to 2016. Mr. Brimeyer added the meeting for the PAC to make a recommendation regarding the locally preferred alternative (LPA) is Wednesday, October 14, 2009. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Mayor Pro Tem Sanger added Mr. Brimeyer would like to obtain feedback from the City Council to take to the meeting on Wednesday. Mr. Brimeyer stated his frustration with the untimely receipt of pertinent information from the County and its consultant. 3. 2010 Budget, 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)/Long Range Financial Management Plan (LRFMP), Community Feedback, Fees and Administrative Penalties Mr. Harmening presented the CIP and funding sources, community resources, new fees and administrative fines, and overview of discussions with the bargaining units. Each of the Department Heads presented their CIPs respectively. Mr. Swanson presented the funding sources for the CIP and the Capital Replacement Fund. Mayor Pro Tem Sanger presented the opportunity to the Councilmembers to add any issue that is not in the Capital Improvement Plan. Ms. Sanger asked that further consideration be given to improving Utica Avenue or the west side of Highway 100. It was agreed that this should be discussed as part of a larger discussion with Mn/DOT and Hennepin County. Mr. Zwilling presented the resident feedback that was obtained on the website. Council decided to hold off publishing the resident feedback until the city was further along in the budget process. Ms. Gohman presented the options for New Fees and Administrative Fines and Penalties. The consensus of the City Council was to have Inspections staff provide more information on the Business License Re-inspection Fee Program for further consideration. Also to have the Fire Chief provide a report on false Fire Alarm fees at some future date. 4. Communications (verbal) None. The meeting adjourned at 9:44 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 5. Surface Water Management Plan Update 6. MN GreenStep Cities Demonstration Project ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 3b OFFICIAL MINUTES Joint City Council / School Board Meeting City of St. Louis Park Council Chambers 3rd Floor October 19, 2009 The meeting convened at 6:00 p.m. Council Members present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, Paul Carver, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt and Loran Paprocki Council Members absent: Sue Sanger School Board Members present: Nancy Gores, Rolf Peterson, Bruce Richardson, Pam Rykken, Larry Shapiro, Julie Sweitzer and Jim Yarosh. City Staff present: Tom Harmening, City Manager; Bridget Gothberg, Organizational Development. Others present: Scott McQueen of Wold Architects and Engineers.  Meeting The School Board and City Council dialogued and received information on the following areas: a. Update on School District’s Districtwide Facilities Study, including presentation by Consultant Wold Architects and Engineers. b. Discussion regarding possible partnership on the installation of artificial turf at the High School football field. Next Meeting The next Joint City Council and School Board meeting will be held in the Spring of 2010. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ City Clerk Mayor Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 3c UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA OCTOBER 19, 2009 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, C. Paul Carver, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt, and Loran Paprocki. Councilmembers absent: Susan Sanger. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Human Resources Director (Ms. Gohman), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Engineering Program Coordinator (Ms. Adler), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes). Guests present: Barr Engineering (Ms. Chandler). 1a. Pledge of Allegiance (led by Boy Scout Troop 307) Mayor Jacobs welcomed Boy Scout Troop 307. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Boy Scout Troop 307. 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations - None 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Study Session Minutes September 29, 2009 The minutes were approved as presented. 3b. Special Study Session Minutes October 5, 2009 Councilmember Finkelstein requested the second paragraph on page 2 be revised to state “Councilmember Finkelstein questioned the purpose of the study session.” Councilmember Finkelstein also requested that the final paragraph on page 2 be revised by adding the following sentence: “In addition, it was the consensus of the City Council for Staff to provide any and all records that the applicant wishes to submit.” Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 3c) Page 2 The minutes were approved as amended. 3c. City Council Minutes October 5, 2009 Councilmember Finkelstein requested the final paragraph on page 4 be revised to read “Councilmember Finkelstein stated he was also concerned with the large loan amount for this project. He felt that viewing the actual conditions of the units, and the scope of changes done by the new association board, as causes for his approval. He noted some changes included reducing the loan amount in question by $750,000, the addition of contracting with an owner’s representative, using vinyl windows, and a change in the financing that would use bond funds proceeds rather than city development funds. He stated he applauds the association for all of their efforts.” The minutes were approved as amended. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. 4a. Adopt Ordinance No. 2376-09 decreasing Mayor and City Councilmember 2010 compensation, and approve the summary ordinance for publication. 4b. Adopt following three actions which will allow for implementation of the housing improvement area project: 1. Adopt second reading of Ordinance No. 2377-09 to establish the Sunset Ridge Condominium Association Housing Improvement Area, approve summary, and authorize publication. 2. Motion to approve Resolution No. 09-129 to impose fees. 3. Motion to authorize execution of Contract for Private Development and any other related documents, by the Mayor and City Manager, between the City and Sunset Ridge Condominium Association. 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 09-130 authorizing filing of application and execution of agreement to develop sport or recreation facilities under the provisions of the Hennepin Youth Sports Program. 4d. Adopt Resolution No. 09-131 Authorizing Final Payment in the amount of $24,395.30 for the construction of the tennis courts at Bass Lake Preserve, City Project No. 2008-4715, Contract No. 113-08. 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 09-132 Authorizing Final Payment in the Amount of $27,737.65 for the Water Treatment Plant No. 8 Filter Rehabilitation Improvement Project, City Project No. 2006-2000, Contract No. 138-08. 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 09-133 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 2909 Raleigh Avenue South, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 3c) Page 3 4g. Approve Resolution No. 09-134 amending Resolution No. 05-151, relating to deferment of special assessments for senior citizens and disabled citizens. 4h. Hennepin County Environmental Response Fund Grant Application Resolution No. 09-139 (MSC Soil Correction. 4i. Adopt Resolution No. 09-135 appointing Finance Manager, Brian Swanson, as an Alternate to the LOGIS Board of Directors. 4j. Adopt for Filing Vendor Claims. 4k. Approve for Filing Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes March 5, 2009. 4l. Approve for Filing Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes April 16, 2009. 4m. Approve for Filing Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes May 20, 2009. 4n. Approve for Filing Planning Commission Minutes August 19, 2009. 4o. Approve for Filing Police Advisory Commission Minutes September 2, 2009. 4p. Minnesota Manufacturer’s Week Proclamation. 4q. Approving for Filing Housing Authority Minutes September 9, 2009. It was moved by Councilmember Carver, seconded by Councilmember Paprocki, to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 6-0. 5. Boards and Commissions - None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing – Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Proposed Modification of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District Resolution No. 09-136 Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and noted the Economic Development Authority took action on this item earlier in the evening. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Paprocki, to adopt Resolution No. 09-136 approving a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and approving a Modified Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District Therein. Councilmember Finkelstein requested an update regarding the Wooddale Avenue closure. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 3c) Page 4 Mr. Harmening stated the closing of Wooddale Avenue has not yet occurred due to the significant amount of utility relocation and utility repairs taking place at this time. He indicated the closure of Wooddale Avenue is dependent upon how the contractor wants to stage the project. He added the City will give residents ample notice of the road closure. The motion passed 6-0. 6b. Public Hearing to Consider 2010 Fees Ms. Gohman presented the staff report and stated the proposed fee schedule includes some minor increases, but overall represents a fairly flat increase from 2009. She pointed out that liquor fees are not included in the schedule; the public hearing for liquor fees will be held on November 16, 2009. She noted one correction to the fee schedule under “Certificate of Property Maintenance,” the 2009 fee was $250 per building and $12 per unit and staff recommends no change in this amount for 2010. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. It was moved by Councilmember Carver, seconded by Councilmember Paprocki, to approve the 1st Reading of Ordinance adopting fees for 2010 and to set Second Reading for November 2, 2009. The motion passed 6-0. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. Adoption of the Surface Water Management Plan Resolution No. 09-137 and Resolution No. 09-138 Ms. Adler presented the staff report and introduced Karen Chandler from Barr Engineering. Ms. Chandler presented an overview of the Surface Water Management Plan and explained the purpose of the Plan is to communicate water resource policies, to implement the City’s vision for environmental stewardship, to serve as a technical information resource, to address redevelopment issues and opportunities to use for planning and budgeting purposes, and to fulfill regulatory requirements. She stated the Plan also serves as a tool to meet Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Met Council and Minnesota Department of Health requirements, most notably the requirement to be phosphorus-free, and the proposed Plan meets that requirement. She indicated the Plan was reviewed and approved by the two watershed districts in September; the Plan was also sent to the Met Council, with no comments received. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 3c) Page 5 It was moved by Councilmember Paprocki, seconded by Councilmember Carver, to adopt Resolution No. 09-137 adopting the Surface Water Management Plan and Resolution No. 09-138 authorizing the approval and execution of a Memorandum of Understanding with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The motion passed 6-0. 9. Communications Mayor Jacobs congratulated the City on receiving the 2009 Northern Lights Award from the Minnesota Association of Government Communicators. He stated staff works very hard to make the City’s website user friendly and interactive and this top honor is a reflection of staff’s efforts. Mayor Jacobs announced the City also recently won honorable mention from the 25th Anniversary Minnesota Community Pride Competition for the Lilac Wayside/Roadside Park beehive project. Mayor Jacobs expressed the City Council’s congratulations to Fire Chief Luke Stemmer on receiving the 2009 Officer of the Year award from the Minnesota State Fire Chiefs Association. Councilmember Paprocki reminded residents the election is fast approaching and encouraged residents to talk to the candidates and take the time to become informed on the issues. Mayor Jacobs stated there will be a candidate debate on Tuesday, October 20th at City Hall sponsored by the League of Women Voters. He noted both City Council and School Board candidates will be in attendance. He stated the debate will be rebroadcast on Cable TV. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:48 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 4a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Second Reading of Ordinance Adopting Fees for 2010 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Second Reading of Ordinance adopting fees for 2010 as outlined in Appendix A of the City Code of Ordinances, approve summary, and authorize publication. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the proposed revisions to the 2010 fee schedule to reflect adjustments to fees charged for programs and services called for by ordinance? BACKGROUND: Sec. 1-19 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code states that fees called for within individual provisions of the Code are to be set by ordinance and listed as Appendix A of the Code. Fees must also be reviewed and reestablished annually. The Finance Department has worked with individual departments to complete this review and their recommendations are included in the attached ordinance. On October 19, 2009, Council approved first reading of the fee schedule and set second reading for November 2, 2009. If approved, the fee increases will be effective January 1, 2010. Fees, rates and charges are called for by resolution or set by a department, and are not required by law to be in the fee schedule, have been omitted. Appendix A looks different than it has in past years but the content is essentially the same with the exception of the liquor license fees, which will be considered during a separate public hearing before the end of the year. Liquor fees were separated out to give staff more time to develop the proposed fees for 2010 and 2011. The public hearing for liquor fees will be held on November 16, 2009 and staff will be recommending a $500 increase to intoxicating liquor license fees for 2010. The other major change in the fee schedule is that fees were previously listed by City Code Chapter and Section; the 2010 fees are organized alphabetically by department. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Each Department Director has reviewed Appendix A of the City Code. The Community Development, Inspections, and Police Departments have each proposed fee increases which are the shown in Appendix A (attached). Unless otherwise noted, proposed fee increases reflect the increased costs of providing services. The proposed fee increases have been incorporated into the proposed 2010 budget. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 2 Community Development Community Development is proposing three new fees for 2010: Numbering of Buildings (new addresses), Zoning Appeals and Zoning Letters. These are services that are currently provided upon request for no fee and are staff intensive. Proposed fees reflect the cost of providing the service and are allowed under the City Code. In addition, Community Development is proposing substantial fee increases for Conditional Use Permit, Planned Unit Development and Special Permits. Fees for these services have not been substantially adjusted in several years and the proposed fees more accurately reflect the cost of providing the review and administration of these planning processes. Inspections Dog Licensing and Off-Leash Dog Park Tags - In response to inquiries from residents about combining dog licensing and off-leash dog park tags into one license, staff completed an analysis of the current system. Staff concluded that it would be more cost effective for residents and staff to issue one dog license for both purposes. How would it work? Under the current fee schedule, St. Louis Park dog owners pay separate fees for dog licenses and for off-lease dog park tags. Last year the city issued 220 off-leash dog park tags and 720 dog license tags. The tag fees cover the cost of administering the licenses and maintaining the dog parks. Based on the analysis, staff concluded that by slightly raising the annual dog license tag fees for residents, the city could issue one dog license tag for both purposes and eliminate the residential off-lease dog park tag. If the dog is licensed, it would automatically be allowed access to the off-leash dog park. It should also be noted that combining the license tag and off-leash dog tag will save staff time and the cost of ordering separate tags. Any two or three year dog licenses previously issued, that still remain in effect for 2010 or beyond, will be allowed to use the off-leash dog park as part of this proposal. The combined license is proposed for residents only. A non-resident off-leash dog park license remains in effect. Installation of a permanent sign with footing - The proposal is to move this type of permit from Community Development as a Sign Permit to a Building Permit. The applicant will submit a building application and plan for review and approval. Once the permit is issued, an inspector will perform a footing and final inspection. Zoning approval will be needed as part of the permit process and approval. The proposed fee will be based on valuation using the building permit table. Sewer and Water Permit (all underground private utilities) - Replace/repair sewer or water service fee for single family properties is proposed to increase from $42.50 to $71.50 to accurately reflect the cost of providing the inspections. Historically, a single inspection was required to approve this type of permit. However, the current materials being used for this type of repair (i.e. liners) requires more than a single inspection before the permitted work is approved and finalized. Police Peddler/Solicitor licenses will move from the Inspections Department to the Police Department in 2010. The increased fee will more accurately reflect the cost of handling and processing the licenses. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 3 VISION CONSIDERATION: None at this time. Attachments: Ordinance Prepared by: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 4 ORDINANCE NO. ______-09 ORDINANCE ADOPTING FEES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2010 THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK ORDAINS: Section 1. Fees called for within individual provisions of the City Code are hereby set by this ordinance for calendar year 2010. Section 2. The Fee Schedule as listed below shall be included as Appendix A of the City Code and shall replace those fees adopted November 3, 2008 by Ordinance #2363-08 which is hereby rescinded. 2009 Fee/Charge 2010 Fee/Charge CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Administrative Penalties First Violation $25 $25 Each Subsequent in Same Calendar Year add $10 to previous fine add $10 to previous fine COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Amendment Filing Fee Single Family $50 $50 Other Uses $120 $120 Amendment Time Extension $75 $75 Comprehensive Plan Amendments $2,000 $2,000 Conditional Use Permit $1,500 $2,000 Major Amendment $1,000 $2,000 Minor Amendment $750 $1,000 Fence Permit Installation $15 $15 Numbering of Buildings (New Addresses) $50 Official Map Amendment $500 $500 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 5 Parking Lot/Driveway Permit Installation/Reconstruction $75 $75 Planned Unit Development Preliminary PUD $1,500 $2,000 Final PUD $1,000 $2,000 Prelim/Final PUD Combined $2,250 $2,250 PUD - Major Amendment $1,000 $2,000 PUD - Minor Amendment $750 $1,000 Registration of Land Use $50 Sign Permit Erection of Temporary Sign $30 $30 Erection of Real Estate, Construction Sign 40+ ft $30 $30 Installation of Permanent Sign $75 $75 Special Permits Major Amendment $1,000 $2,000 Minor Amendment $750 $1,000 Subdivision Dedication Park Dedication (in lieu of land) Commercial/Industrial Properties 5 percent of current market value of the unimproved land as determined by the city assessor 5 percent of current market value of the unimproved land as determined by the city assessor Multi-family Dwelling Units $1,500 per dwelling unit $1,500 per dwelling unit Single-family Dwelling Units $1,500 per dwelling unit $1,500 per dwelling unit Trails $225 per residential dwelling unit $225 per residential dwelling unit Subdivisions/Replats Preliminary Plat $500 plus $50 per lot $500 plus $50 per lot Final Plat $300 $300 Combined Process and Replats $750 plus $25 per lot $750 plus $25 per lot Exempt and Administrative Subdivisions $300 $300 Tree Replacement Cash in lieu of replacement trees $110 per caliper inch $115 per caliper inch Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 6 Traffic Management Plan Administrative Fee $0.10 per sq ft of gross floor $0.10 per sq ft of gross floor Variances Commercial $500 $500 Residential $300 $300 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Zoning Appeal $300 Zoning Letter $50 Zoning Map Amendments $2,000 $2,000 Zoning Permit Accessory Structures, 120 ft or less $25 $25 Zoning Text Amendments $2,000 $2,000 FIRE DEPARTMENT Fireworks Display Permit Actual costs incurred Actual costs incurred Service Fees Service Fee for fully-equipped and staffed vehicles $500 per hour for a ladder truck $500 per hour for a ladder truck $325 per hour for a full-size fire truck $325 per hour for a full-size fire truck $255 per hour for a rescue unit $255 per hour for a rescue unit Service Fee of a Chief Officer $100 per hour $100 per hour Tent Permit Tent over 200 sq. ft. $75.00 $75.00 Canopy over 400 sq. ft. $75.00 $75.00 INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT Building Demolition Deposit 1 & 2 Family Residential & Accessory Structures $2,500 $2,500 All Other Buildings $5,000 $5,000 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 7 Building Demolition Permit 1 & 2 Family Residential & Accessory Structures $150 $150 All Other Buildings $220 $220 Building Moving Permit $500 $500 Business Licenses Billboards $135 per billboard $140 per billboard Commercial Entertainment $270 $270 Courtesy Bench $40 $45 Dog Kennel $140 $140 Environmental Emissions $295 $305 Lodging (Hotel/Motel) Building Fee $150.00 $155 Unit Fee $8.25 $9 Massage Therapy Establishment $295 $325 Pawnbroker License Fee $2,000 $2,000 Per Transaction Fee $1.50 $1.50 Investigation Fee $1,000 $1,000 Penalty $50 per day $50 per day Sexually Oriented Business Investigation Fee (High Impact) $500 $500 High Impact $4,500 $4,500 Limited Impact $125 $125 Tobacco Products & Related Device Sales $485 $485 Vehicle Parking Facilities Enclosed Parking $190 $200 Parking Ramp $140 $150 Certificate of Occupancy For each condominium unit completed after building occupancy $100.00 $100 Change of Use (does not apply to 1 & 2 family dwellings) Up to 5,000 sq ft $270 $280 5,001 to 25,000 sq ft $420 $440 25,001 to 75,000 sq ft $620 $650 75,001 to 100,000 sq ft $820 $860 100,000 to 200,000 sq ft $1,020 $1,070 above 200,000 sq ft $1,220 $1,280 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy $50 $50 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 8 Certificate of Property Maintenance Certificate of Property Maintenance Extension $50 $50 Change in Ownership Single Family Dwellings $200 $210 Duplex (2 Family dwellings) $285 $295 Condominium Unit $120 $130 Multi-Family (apartment) Buildings $250 per building + $12 per unit $250 per building + $12 per unit All Other Buildings: Up to 5,000 sq ft $270 $280 5,001 – 25,000 sq ft $420 $440 25,001 to 75,000 sq ft $620 $650 75,001 to 100,000 sq ft $820 $860 100,000 to 200,000 sq. ft $1,020 $1,070 above 200,000 sq. ft $1,220 $1,280 Temporary Certificate of Property Maintenance $50 $60 Construction Permits (building, electrical, fire protection, mechanical, plumbing, pools, utilities) Building and Fire Protection Permits Valuation Up to $500 Base Fee $42.25 Base Fee $42.25 $500.01 to $2,000.00 Base Fee $42.25 plus $1.80 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $100 over $500.01 Base Fee $42.25 plus $1.80 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $100 over $500.01 $2,000.01 to $25,000.00 Base Fee $69.25 plus $14.00 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $2,000.01 Base Fee $69.25 plus $14.00 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $2,000.01 $25,000.01 to $50,000.00 Base Fee $391.25 plus $10.10 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $25,000.01 Base Fee $391.25 plus $10.10 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $25,000.01 $50,000.01 to $100,000.00 Base Fee $643.75 plus $7.00 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $50,000.01 Base Fee $643.75 plus $7.00 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $50,000.01 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 9 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 Base Fee $993.75 plus $5.60 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $100.000.01 Base Fee $993.75 plus $5.60 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $100.000.01 $500,000.01 to $1,000,000.00 Base Fee $3,233.75 plus $4.75 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $500,000.01 Base Fee $3,233.75 plus $4.75 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $500,000.01 $1,000,000.01 and up Base Fee $5,608.75 plus $4.25 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $1,000,000.01 Base Fee $5,608.75 plus $4.25 for each additional (or fraction thereof) $1,000 over $1,000,000.01 Electrical Permit Installation, Replacement, Repair $42.50 + 1.75% of job valuation $42.50 + 1.75% of job valuation Installation of traffic signals per location $150 $150 Single family, one appliance $42.50 $42.50 Erosion Control Permit Application and Review $150 $150 ISTS Permit (sewage treatment system install or repair) $125.00 $125.00 Mechanical Permit Installation, Replacement, Repair $42.50 + 1.75% of job valuation $42.50 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Replace furnace, boiler or furnace/AC $60.00 $60.00 Install single fuel burning appliance with piping $60.00 $60.00 Install, replace or repair single mechanical appliance $42.50 $42.50 Plumbing Permit Installation, Replacement, Repair $42.50 + 1.75% of job valuation $42.50 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Repair/replace single plumbing fixture $42.50 $42.50 Private Swimming Pool Permit Building permit fees apply Building permit fees apply Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 10 Public Swimming Pool Permit Building permit fees apply Building permit fees apply Sewer and Water Permit (all underground private utilities) Installation, Replacement, Repair $42.50 + 1.75% of job valuation $42.50 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Replace/repair sewer or water service $42.50 $71.50 Competency Exams Fees Mechanical per test $30 $30 Renewal - 3 year Mechanical $20 $25 Contractor Licenses Mechanical $90 $95 Solid Waste $190 $195 Tree Maintenance $80 $85 Dog Licenses 1 year $20 $25 2 year $30 $37 3 year $40 $50 Potentially Dangerous Dog License – 1 year $100 $100 Dangerous Dog License – 1 year $200 $250 Interim License $40 $40 Off-Leash Dog Area Permit (non-resident) $50 $55 Off-Leash Dog Area Permit (resident) $25 Penalty for no license $15 $15 Food and Beverage Equipment Permit Installation (used equipment valued as new) $50 + 1.75% permit valuation $50 + 1.75% permit valuation Plan Review Fee 35% of permit fee 35% of permit fee Food and Beverage Licenses Class E (multi-site educational facilities) $2,800 $2,800 High + & large grocery store (25,000 sq ft +) $1,200 $1,250 High + small grocery store (to 25,000 sq ft) $880 $900 Class H (establishment with on-site preparation of food and dining service) $830 $850 Class L - (prepackaged food) $290 $300 Class M - (coffee shop) $560 $580 Class V - (food vending machine) $15 $15 Temporary Food Service 3+ days $140 $150 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 11 1 to 3 days $90 $100 Concession - Seasonal (Class S) $180 $180 Prepackaged Food Only $40 $40 Inspections After Hours Inspections $55 per hour (minimum 2 hrs.) $65 per hour (minimum 2 hrs.) Installation of permanent sign w/footing inspection $100 Based on valuation using building permit table Insurance Requirements Circus $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Mechanical Contractors $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Solid Waste $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Tree Maintenance & Removal $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability Vehicle Parking Facility $1,000,000 General Liability $1,000,000 General Liability ISTS Permit (sewage treatment system install or repair $125 $125 License Fees - Other Investigation Fee $300 per establishment requiring a business license $300 per establishment requiring a business license Late Fee 25% of license fee (minimum $50) 25% of license fee (minimum $50) License Reinstatement Fee $250 $250 Transfer of License (new ownership) $60 $75 Plan Review Building Permits 65% of Permit Fee 65% of Permit Fee Repetitive Building 25% of Permit Fee for Duplicate Structure 25% of Permit Fee for Duplicate Structure Single Family Interior Remodel Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Plumbing Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Mechanical Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Electrical Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Sewer & Water Permits 35% of Permit Fee 35% of Permit Fee Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 12 Public Sanitary Facilities - Swimming Pools, Whirlpool, Sauna (Dry or Steam), Public Bath or Shower, Training Beds or Similar Facilities Class I $790 $800 Class II $430 $440 Class III $270 $280 Rental Housing License Single Family Unit $90 per dwelling unit $95 per dwelling unit Duplex both sides non-owner occupied $140 per duplex $145 per duplex Housing Authority owned single family dwelling units $15 per unit $15 per unit Condominium/Townhouse/ Cooperative $70 per unit $75 per unit Multiple Family Per Building $150 $155 Per Unit $9.25 $10 Temporary Noise Permit $55 $60 Temporary Use Permits Amusement Rides, Carnivals & Circuses $260 $260 Commercial Film Production Application $80 $80 Petting Zoos $60 $60 Temporary Outdoor Retail Sales $110 $110 Vehicle Decals Catering $75 $75 Solid Waste $20 $20 Tree Maintenance & Removal $8 $8 POLICE DEPARTMENT Animals Animal Impound Initial impoundment $20 $25 2nd offense w/in year $30 $40 3rd offense w/in year $40 $50 4th offense w/in year $60 $75 Boarding Per Day $10 $25 Dangerous Dog Annual Review Hearing $250 $250 Potentially Dangerous Dog Annual Review Hearing $100 $100 Criminal Background Investigation Volunteers & Employees $5 $5 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 13 False Alarm First $0 $0 Each subsequent in same year 90 $100 Late payment fee 10% 10% Solicitor/Peddler Registration $70 $150 Vehicle Forfeiture Administrative fee in certain vehicle forfeiture cases $250 $250 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Installation/repair of Sidewalk, Curb Cut or Curb and Gutter Permit $10 per 10 linear feet $10 per 10 linear feet Administrative Fee (all permits) $50 $50 Permit to Exceed Vehicle Weight Limitations $30 each $30 each Record Deed Transfer with Hennepin County $120 + Recording Cost $120 + Recording Cost Snowfall Parking Permit Caregiver parking $25 $25 No off-street parking available No Charge No Charge Off-street parking available $125 $125 Street, Alley, Utility Vacations $300 $300 Work in Public Right-of-Way Permit Administrative Fee (all permits) $50 $50 Hole in Roadway/Blvd (larger than 10" diameter) $50 per hole $50 per hole Trenching in Roadway $400 per 100 linear feet minimum $400) $400 per 100 linear feet minimum $400) Trenching in Boulevard $200 per 100 linear feet (minimum $200) $200 per 100 linear feet (minimum $200) Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4a) Page 14 Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2010. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: City Clerk City Attorney Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 4b Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Upgrade of 911 Emergency Communications Center. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Authorize the Execution of a Contract with Qwest Communications to Upgrade the 911 Emergency Communications System for an Amount not to exceed $271,574.00. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to make the necessary improvements to the City’s 911 Communication system? BACKGROUND: The existing 911 system is approximately 10 years old and is nearing the end of its useful life. The manufacturer has scheduled support for the system to be discontinued. Additionally, the current system is not upgradeable to the next generation 911 National Emergency Number Association (NENA) protocol. The 911 upgrade project will provide four major enhancements over the existing system. 1) The new system will provide a fully upgradable pathway to the next generation 911 protocol. The current system is not upgradable. 2) It provides feature set integration with the Cisco VOIP phone system used by the City. Dispatch administrative lines will be integrated into the 911 answering stations. 3) A remote interface will be installed into the communications van so 911 calls can be handled directly from the van during a major event or disaster. 4) The system has a robust analytic and audit feature set that will allow increased accuracy in monitoring call loads and trends. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The 911 system upgrade has a total price of $271,574.00 including tax. The project is sole source as it is an upgrade of existing equipment. The funding for the project will be obtained from the 911 Fund which will absorb the entire cost. The equipment will be installed and maintained by Qwest. The contract and related document have been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: Qwest Sales/Installation Agreement Prepared by: John D. Luse, Chief of Police Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 PUBLIC SAFETY PRODUCT CPE E911 SALES/INSTALLATION AGREEMENT Qwest Communications Company, LLC (“Qwest”) and City of St. Louis Park ("Customer"), a public entity organized under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereby enter into this Public Safety Product Sales/Installation Agreement ("Agreement"). Customer’s current address, facsimile number, and person designated for notices are: Deputy Chief Kirk DiLorenzo 3015 Raleigh Ave. South St. Louis Park, MN 55416-5705 kdilorenzo@stlouispark.org (952) 924-2134 1. Products and Services Supplied under this Agreement. 1.1 Qwest will provide and Customer will purchase the Public Safety Product hardware and/or software (“Product”) specified in Attachment 1 to this Agreement. Customer will purchase Product(s) to provide public safety emergency communications services. 1.2 Qwest will install Product(s) specified in Attachment 1 according to the terms and conditions described in Attachment 2 to this Agreement, titled, Installation. 2. Sales Price and Payment Terms. 2.1 Qwest's prices for Product(s) and installation appear in Attachment 1 to this Agreement. All charges will be paid within 30 days of the invoice date and in accordance with the payment schedules referenced in Attachment 3 to this Agreement, titled, Payment Schedule. Prices quoted in this Agreement will be good until November 29th, 2009. After such date, prices are subject to change. 2.2 Late Payment Charge - Qwest will apply a service charge of 1½% per month on any unpaid balance not received by Qwest within 45 days of the invoice date. 3. Taxes and Fees. Prices do not include taxes or fees, of any kind, established by governmental authorities. Customer will pay all such applicable taxes and fees when billed by Qwest. Alternatively, Customer may supply Qwest a tax exemption certificate in a form satisfactory to Qwest. 4. Customer Responsibilities. 4.1 Customer will ensure that its personnel are available to receive delivery of Product(s) at site, at a date and time to be determined between Qwest and Customer. Risk of loss and damage to Product(s) passes to Customer upon delivery of Product(s) to Customer at site. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 3 4.2 Customer agrees to grant reasonable right of entry to Qwest's representatives to deliver the Product(s) or perform all services contemplated under or by virtue of this Agreement, or both, and will make available a reasonable amount of appropriate secure space for storage of Product(s) or parts as necessary. 4.3 Customer is responsible for proper site preparation, meeting and maintaining proper environmental conditions, including but not limited to, air conditioning, cleanliness, temperature requirements, and electrical requirements as indicated by the manufacturers of Product(s) in Attachment 1. Customer agrees to follow the National Emergency Numbering Association (“NENA”) recommendations and guidelines for site preparation as set forth in the NENA Technical Information Document 04-502, which can be found at www.nena.org. 4.4 Product(s) delivered to Customer will be available at site on the installation date. The estimated installation begin and complete dates are identified in Attachment 2 to this Agreement. 5. Health and Safety Compliance. Qwest and Customer will adhere to all applicable health and safety laws, rules and regulations including the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's ("OSHA") rules and regulations. Customer agrees to certify that there is no asbestos on any premises in any areas where Qwest will be working. In the event Customer will not certify an asbestos free environment or asbestos is discovered in the Qwest work area, there may be additional costs to perform under this Agreement in compliance with OSHA's rules and regulations. Customer understands and agrees this Agreement does not include the prices attributable to working in an asbestos environment including, but not limited to, asbestos sampling, testing, cleanup, or rerouting or delays caused by any of the above. Customer understands and agrees that prices attributable to any of the above will be in addition to the price agreed to herein and the Customer agrees to pay the additional amounts. Customer's non-compliance with this provision will be considered as Customer's default under this Agreement. 6. Customer Acceptance. Customer must notify Qwest in writing and specify any portions of the product(s) listed in attachment 1 that are unacceptable. If customer does not notify Qwest within 20 calendar days from the installation date or delivery date, whichever is applicable, product(s) will be deemed accepted. Any product installed by Qwest is considered acceptable if it is installed and operates materially in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. Qwest reserves the right to correct any portion of a product that has been rejected by customer. Any portion of a product that has not been rejected by customer and is functionally divisible will be deemed accepted and may be invoiced separately. Moves and changes are considered accepted when the described work is materially completed. Any portion of a product that is found to be unacceptable after the 20-day acceptance period may be reported to the Qwest E911 call center at 1-800-357-0911. 7. Adds; Changes. Any changes to a Product order or installation request and any additional Product orders or installation requests must be by written amendment or by submitting a 911 CPE purchase order (“Purchase Order”) to Qwest. The amendment or Purchase Order will be signed by authorized representatives of both parties and made a part of this Agreement. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 4 8. Right to Subcontract. It is specifically agreed that Qwest may subcontract all or any portion of the work without the prior written consent of Customer. Qwest will remain responsible for the work of any subcontractor. 9. Confidentiality; Publicity. Neither party will, without the prior written consent of the other party: (a) disclose any of the terms of the Agreement or use the name or marks of the other party or its Affiliates; or (b) disclose or use (except as expressly permitted by, or required to achieve the purposes of, the Agreement) the Confidential Information of the other party. Qwest’s consent may only be given by its Legal Department. “Affiliate” means any entity controlled by, controlling, or under common control with a party. A party may disclose Confidential Information if required to do so by a governmental agency, by operation of law, or if necessary in any proceeding to establish rights or obligations under the Agreement, provided that the disclosing party gives the non- disclosing party reasonable prior written notice. “Confidential Information” means any information that is not generally available to the public, whether of a technical, business or other nature and that: (c) the receiving party knows or has reason to know is confidential, proprietary or trade secret information of the disclosing party; and/or (d) is of such a nature that the receiving party should reasonably understand that the disclosing party desires to protect such information against unrestricted disclosure. Confidential Information will not include information that is in the public domain through no breach of this Agreement by the receiving party or is already known or is independently developed by the receiving party. Disclosures by Customer required by the Minnesota Data Practices Act (Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13) or any other state or federal law relating to disclosure of governmental data are not subject to the provisions of this paragraph. 10. Limitation of Liability. 10.1 Operation of public safety systems, customer premises services and product(s) is the sole responsibility of customer. Qwest's sole undertaking is limited to providing the product(s) sold and installation of the product(s) in accordance with the terms and conditions of this agreement. The provision of product(s) sold and services performed by Qwest to customer will not be interpreted, construed, or regarded, either expressly or implied, as being for the benefit of, or creating any Qwest obligation toward any third party or legal entity other than customer. Qwest's obligations extend solely to customer. 10.2 Qwest will in no event be liable to the customer, or to any person or company using any product or service supplied under these terms and conditions or to whom customer furnishes a product or service, for indirect, special, incidental or consequential damages arising as a result of this agreement. Qwest's entire liability for any claim or loss, damage or expense from any cause whatsoever will in no event exceed the higher of the repair or replacement cost of the item which directly gives rise to the claim. This paragraph will not obligate the customer to indemnify Qwest for damages suffered because of Qwest's negligence or intentional acts with respect to Qwest's provision of equipment or installation of equipment covered by this agreement. 10.3 Consistent with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 403, specifically, Minnesota Statutes Section 403.07, Subdivision 5 and with 47 USCS § 615a, and except for willful or wanton misconduct, Qwest is not liable for civil damages and penalties to the extent provided in Minn. Stat. § 403.07, Subd. 5, 47 USCS § 615a and other applicable statutes, judicial decisions or tariffs. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 5 11. Warranties. 11.1 The warranty provided in this paragraph is limited and exclusive. No other warranties of any kind, expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose, will apply to services rendered under this agreement. 11.2 Warranty for product(s) will begin on the date of installation and will continue for one full calendar year. During this warranty period, Qwest will provide service to keep product(s) listed in Attachment 1 in good working order and to ensure product(s) conform to the specifications, terms, and conditions of this agreement. 11.3 During the warranty period, Qwest will repair or replace, at no charge, product(s) Qwest finds to be defective due to quality of material or manufacturer's workmanship. 11.4 Personnel furnished by Qwest will be qualified to perform tasks and functions for which they are assigned and will perform them in a professional manner. 11.5 If the product(s) or services fail to meet the terms of this warranty as a result of the actions or negligence of customer or actions of a third party (other than an agent of, or independent contractor of Qwest), or damage relating to acts of god, fire, vandalism, operator error, use of improper supplies, or customer interfaces of peripheral equipment, then customer will pay all charges associated with the repair or replacement thereof if customer so elects to repair or replace said items. 12. Exclusions to Warranties. 12.1 The warranties provided by Qwest under this agreement do not include the following services: a. Furnishing supplies that are not part of the product(s) or furnishing material therefor; b. Electrical work external to product(s) sold under this agreement; c. Work or supply of material relating to maintaining a proper environment at site unless indicated in attachment 1 to this agreement; d. Equipment not sold, installed, and maintained by Qwest. 12.2 Qwest does not warrant that the operation of the product(s) will be uninterrupted or error free. 12.3 Warranty does not cover product(s) affected by operator error, misuse of product(s) or force majeure events. 12.4 Warranty and maintenance on uninterrupted power supply (“ups”) are through the manufacturer and do not include battery replacement. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 6 13. Software License. One or more of the Product(s) may be or may contain software. In some cases the Product(s) manufacturer (Qwest's vendor) has embedded such software into the hardware as an integral part of the Product(s). All software remains the property and full ownership of the creator, developer, manufacturer, or copywriter, whichever the case may be. If required by creator, developer, manufacturer or copywriter, a license must be agreed to by the end-user (Qwest's Customer), to use such software and may contain specific terms and conditions for such use. These specific terms and conditions for use are governed entirely by said creator, developer, manufacturer, or copywriter and will be adhered to by both parties. Upon the requirement of creator, developer, manufacturer or copywriter to execute a Software License Agreement or Software Sub-License Agreement by end-user and/or Qwest, such license must be executed by Qwest’s Customer as required, and will become a part of this Agreement by reference. 14. Default by Customer. In the event Customer fails or neglects to comply with any term or condition of this Agreement or to pay for services as provided herein, Qwest will have the right, after written notice, to cease performance or warranty service hereunder. This remedy will be in addition to any other remedies, including termination, available to Qwest in law or equity. 15. Governing Law; Dispute Resolution. 16.1 Governing Law; Forum. Minnesota state law, without regard to choice-of-law principles, governs all matters arising out of, or relating to, this Agreement. Any legal proceeding relating to this Agreement will be brought in a U.S. District Court, or absent federal jurisdiction, in a state court of competent jurisdiction. 16. Notices. Unless otherwise provided herein, all required notices to Qwest must be in writing, sent to 1801 California St., #900, Denver, CO 80202; Fax #: 888-778-0054; Attn.: Legal Dep’t, and to Customer at its then current address as reflected in Qwest’s records; Attn.: General Counsel or other person designated for notices. Unless otherwise provided herein, all notices will be deemed given: (a) when delivered in person to the recipient named above; (b) three business days after delivered via regular U.S. Mail; (c) when delivered via overnight courier mail; or (d) when delivered by fax if duplicate notice is also sent by regular U.S. Mail. 17. General. Customer represents that it is not a reseller and will not resell the Service. Customer may not assign the Agreement or any of its rights or obligations under the Agreement without the prior written consent of Qwest, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. Customer may not assign to a reseller or a telecommunications carrier under any circumstances. The Agreement is intended solely for Qwest and Customer and not to benefit any other person or entity, (e.g., End Users). If any term of the Agreement is held unenforceable, such term will be construed as nearly as possible to reflect the original intent of the parties and the remaining terms will remain in effect. Neither party’s failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision of the Agreement will be construed as a waiver of any of its rights hereunder. All terms of the Agreement that should by their nature survive the termination of the Agreement will so survive. Neither party will be liable for any delay or failure to perform its obligations hereunder if such delay or failure is caused by a Force Majeure Event. “Force Majeure Event” means an unforeseeable event beyond the reasonable control of that party, including without limitation: act of God, fire, flood, labor strike, sabotage, fiber cuts, acts of terror, material shortages or unavailability, government laws or regulations, war or civil Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 7 disorder, or failures of suppliers of goods and services. All amendments to the Agreement must be in writing and signed by the parties’ authorized representatives. Nothing herein will be construed to limit Customer’s use of the services pursuant to a Joint Powers Agreement or other contractual arrangement with other governmental entities for the provision of emergency services. Each party reserves the right at any time to reject any handwritten change to the Agreement. 18. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between Customer and Qwest and supersedes all prior oral or written agreements or understandings relating to this subject matter. Qwest and Customer execute and authorize this Agreement as of the last date shown below. City of St. Louis Park Qwest Communications Company, LLC Authorized Signature Authorized Signature Jeff Jacobs Name Typed or Printed Mayor Offer Management Title Title Date Date Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 8 Authorized Signature Thomas K. Harmening City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 9 ATTACHMENT 1 TO PUBLIC SAFETY PRODUCT SALES/INSTALLATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN CUSTOMER AND QWEST COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, LLC ========================================================================================= PRODUCT(S) 1. Product Pricing Product Description Part No. Price/Each Quantity Total Price Positron VIPER Positron Viper Media Kit 912890 - 1 Positron CAMA Gateway Shelf 912800 760.32 3 $ 2,280.96 Positron CAMA Interface Module 912801 2,065.92 2 $ 4,131.84 Positron Admin Interface Module (AIM) 912814 1,075.20 3 $ 3,225.60 Positron Primary Backroom Server 912802 4,380.00 1 $ 4,380.00 Positron Primary VoIP Soft Switch 912803 3,180.00 1 $ 3,180.00 24 Port Switch 912806 990.00 2 $1,980.00 Backroom Position Access License 912811 1,528.32 5 $7,641.60 PBX Access License - Per Workstation 912812 990.72 4 $3,962.88 ECCP Workstation License 912920 3,648.00 4 $14,592.00 Power Supply (-48V DC) 912813 1,194.00 2 $2,388.00 RACKMOUNT UPS 1000VA 914414 2,034.00 2 $4,068.00 4 FOOT IT CABINET 912807 5,337.60 1 $5,337.60 Positron Secondary Backroom Server 912822 3,900.00 1 $3,900.00 Positron Secondary VoIP Soft Switch 912823 3,180.00 1 $3,180.00 Positron VIPER Enabling Kit 913850/G2 2,496.00 3 $7,488.00 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 10 Power 911 5.1 Software Power 911 Media 913100/C D 76.80 1 $76.80 Power 911 Client Access License 913100 7,676.16 4 $30,704.64 Power 911 Server Access License 913202 1,532.16 4 $6,128.64 Power IWS Hardware IWS Underlying System Software - Workstation 914120/1 390.00 4 $1,560.00 Power 911 Workstation Computer (No Monitor) 914101/NS 1,674.00 3 $5,022.00 19 Inch LCD Monitor 914704 690.00 3 $2,070.00 HP 8710p - 17" Widescreen TFT 914110/1 4,320.00 1 $4,320.00 IWS Underlying System Software - Server 914120/2 3,261.60 1 $3,261.60 IWS Type 1 Tower Server (1CPU) 160GB SATA HD 914210 1,909.20 1 $1,909.20 160GB SATA Non Hotplug Hard Disk (ML110, DL160 & DC7900) 914245 138.00 1 $138.00 IWS Underlying System Software - Server 914120/2 3,261.60 1 $3,261.60 IWS Type 1 Tower Server (1CPU) 160GB SATA HD 914210 1,909.20 1 $1,909.20 160GB SATA Non Hotplug Hard Disk (ML110, DL160 & DC7900) 914245 138.00 1 $138.00 Additional Backup EXEC SQL Agent 914422 1,356.00 1 $1,356.00 IWS SRV TAPE BACKUP SYSTEM 914431 3,486.00 1 $3,486.00 IWS Workstation UPS (positions and P911 DB Server) 914410 891.49 4 $3,565.97 Power MIS Power MIS Media & Documentation 920100/C D 76.80 1 $76.80 Power MIS Server Software 920100 711.94 1 $711.94 POWER MIS ADD'L CLNT ACCESS LISC 920101 309.50 1 $309.50 Power MIS Data License 920102 650.50 4 $2,601.98 IP Phones Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4b) Page 11 IP Phone - Snom 320 912810 420.00 3 $1,260.00 PBX Access License - Per Workstation 912812 990.72 0 $ - Positron VIPER Software Evergreen 912800/SE 5 26,506.66 1 $26,506.66 Power 911 Software Evergreen 913100/SE 5 20,258.30 1 $20,258.30 Power MIS Software Evergreen 920000/SE 5 1,992.88 1 $1,992.88 Miscellaneous Materials 7,123.48 1 $7,123.48 Freight $2,545.46 1 $2,545.46 First Year Warranty 10,690.95 1 $10,690.95 Total Price for Product $214,722.09 2. Installation Pricing. Customer will pay the following total installation charge for the Product(s) listed above: $40,560.00. Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 4c Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 100-08 - J. Carlson & Son’s – Project No. 2008-2700. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment to J. Carlson & Son’s in the amount of $5,635.38 for City Hall Exterior Renovation Project No. 2008-2700, Contract No. 100-08. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: The City Hall building was constructed in 1963. Staff observed the exterior exposed aggregate concrete wall finish and joint caulking had begun displaying deterioration in 2006. INSPEC, a consulting firm with a division that specializes in vertical exterior surface’s, was utilized to develop specifications for the repair project. The overall project’s first phase was for the concrete repair, coating, and caulking work and was performed by J. Carlson & Son’s. Additional phases included the previously completed metal facia/roof-top equipment screening and the landscaping project, necessary to restore vegetation, install irrigation, and replace a retaining wall. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The entire CIP project had a total overall budget allocation of $350,000 for 2008. This first phase consisting of concrete repairs and coating in contract 100-08, was estimated to cost $170,000. The related work for this contract is now completed with a final cost of $114,410.38. The Capital Replacement Fund is the source of funding for this project. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachment: Resolution Prepared by: John Altepeter, Facilities Maintenance Superintendent Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4c) Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 09-___ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT TO J. CARLSON & SON’S IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,635.38 FOR CITY HALL EXTERIOR RENOVATION PROJECT NO. 2008-2700, CONTRACT NO. 100-08 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated August 4, 2008, J. Carlson & Son’s has satisfactorily completed the City Hall Exterior Renovation Project, as per Contract No. 100-08. 2. The Director of Inspection has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the work. 3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. Original Contract Price $108,775.00 Change Order 1 3,932.59 Previous Payments $107,072.21 Balance Due $5,635.38 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 4d Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Resolution Ratifying Publication of Notice of Public Hearing for Park Nicollet Private Activity Revenue Refunding Bonds. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution ratifying the publication of a notice of public hearing and establishing the date for a public hearing regarding the issuance of health care facilities revenue refunding bonds under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1651, as amended. POLICY CONSIDERATION: A public hearing is scheduled for November 16, 2009 before the City Council to consider approving issuance of private activity revenue refunding bonds for Park Nicollet. This resolution documents the City Council’s intent to hold the hearing and to publish the hearing notice. BACKGROUND: As outlined in a written staff report for the October 26, 2009 study session, Park Nicollet Health Services is seeking to replace the variable rate portion of private activity bonds issued for them in 2008 with new fixed rate debt. For the City to consider this request, a public hearing must be held. That hearing is scheduled for November 16, 2009. Published notice of the hearing appeared in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on October 29th. The purpose of the attached resolution is to document and confirm the City Council’s intent to hold a hearing on November 16th and to have the hearing notice published. Park Nicollet is working with the city’s bond counsel, Kennedy & Graven, on the specifics of the proposed bond refunding and the necessary documents. This is conduit financing and not an obligation of the City of St. Louis Park. It does not affect the city’s ability to issue debt for its own purposes nor does it affect the city’s bond rating. Setting the public hearing starts the process, which Park Nicollet hopes to complete by the end of the year. Also attached to this staff report is a letter from the city’s bond counsel, Kennedy & Graven, explaining in more detail Park Nicollet’s request and the process. Kennedy and Graven and representatives from Park Nicollet will be in attendance at the November 16th City Council meeting to answer any questions of the City Council or public hearing attendees. The City Council will be asked to approve the issuance of the bonds at that meeting. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Park Nicollet is responsible for the costs of preparing for and issuing the bonds. They are required by city policy to pay an initial application fee to cover city costs. These bonds are not obligations of the Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 2 city in any respect. In addition, city policy requires payment of an annual administration fee of 1/8th of one per cent of the outstanding principal balance of the bonds. PNHS paid this administration fee in a single lump sum payment on the principal of the previous bonds issued. PNHS will continue to meet its obligations regarding the administration fee per the city’s policies. The monies generated from the administration fees are deposited in the city’s Housing Rehabilitation fund. VISION CONSIDERATION: The fees generated from the issuance of private activity bonds adds to the financial strength of our Housing Rehab fund which supports our Vision of a community with diverse and well maintained housing. Attachments: Resolution Kennedy and Graven Letter Prepared by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Finance Manager Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.09-____ RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND ESTABLISHING THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ISSUANCE OF HEALTH CARE FACILITIES REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS 469.152 THROUGH 469.1651, AS AMENDED BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”), as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. Pursuant to the Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152-469.1651, as amended (the “Act”), the City is authorized to issue revenue bonds for the following purposes: (i) to finance, in whole or in part, the cost of the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, improvement, betterment or extension of a project, defined in the Act as any properties, real or personal, used or useful in connection with a revenue producing enterprise; and (ii) to refund, in whole or in part, bonds previously issued by the City under the authority of the Act and interest on such bonds, 1.02. Park Nicollet Health Services, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, Park Nicollet Institute, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, Park Nicollet Clinic, a Minnesota association that has elected to be treated as a nonprofit corporation, PNMC Holdings, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, and Park Nicollet Health Care Products, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (collectively, the “Obligated Group”), have proposed that the City issue its Health Care Facilities Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2009 (the “Series 2009 Bonds”), in one or more series, in an approximate principal amount not to exceed $215,000,000. The proceeds of the Series 2009 Bonds are to be applied to refund the outstanding principal amount of the (i) Variable Rate Demand Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2008A (the “Series 2008A Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $41,830,000; (ii) Variable Rate Demand Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2008B-1 (the “Series 2008B-1 Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $57,645,000; and (iii) Variable Rate Demand Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2008B-2 (the “Series 2008B-2 Bonds,” and collectively with the Series 2008B-1 Bonds, the “Series 2008B Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $45,400,000. The Series 2008A Bonds and the Series 2008B Bonds are referred to collectively as the “Series 2008 Bonds.” 1.03. Proceeds of the Series 2008A Bonds were loaned to the Obligated Group and applied by the Obligated Group to redeem and prepay the outstanding principal amount of the Health Care Facilities Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2007A (the “Series 2007A Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $41,600,000. Proceeds of the Series 2007A Bonds were previously loaned to the Obligated Group and applied by Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 4 the Obligated Group to redeem and prepay the outstanding principal amount of the Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2003B (the “Series 2003B Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $41,550,000. The proceeds of the Series 2003B Bonds were used to finance: (i) the construction and equipping of the Obligated Group’s Heart and Vascular Center at Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital located at 6500 Excelsior Boulevard in the City, the construction of a parking ramp and other improvements at Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, the construction of public infrastructure improvements with respect to the foregoing, and the acquisition and installation of equipment for Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital; and (ii) the acquisition and installation of a computed tomography scanner (“CT Scanner”) at Park Nicollet Clinic, located at 14000 Fairview Drive in the City of Burnsville, Minnesota, a CT Scanner at Park Nicollet Clinic, located at 15800 95th Avenue North in the City of Maple Grove, Minnesota, and a CT Scanner and a magnetic resonance imaging scanner (“MRI Scanner”) at Park Nicollet Clinic, located at 250 North Central Avenue in the City of Wayzata, Minnesota. 1.04. Proceeds of the Series 2008B Bonds were loaned to the Obligated Group and applied by the Obligated Group to redeem and prepay the outstanding principal amount of the (i) Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2007B-1, issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $56,595,000 (the “Series 2007B-1 Bonds”); and (ii) Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2007B-1, issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $44,575,000 (the “Series 2007B-2 Bonds,” and collectively with the Series 2007B-1 Bonds, the “Series 2007B Bonds”). Proceeds of the Series 2007B Bonds were loaned to the Obligated Group to finance the (i) acquisition, construction, and equipping of an approximately 82,000 square foot building to house the Obligated Group’s Cancer Center and related facilities with approximately 31,000 square feet of the building reserved for future expansion, located at 6490 Excelsior Boulevard in the City; (ii) acquisition, construction, and equipping of a new parking ramp including approximately 1,700 parking stalls adjacent to the Cancer Center; (iii) redesign and renovation of the emergency center at Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital located at 6500 Excelsior Boulevard in the City; (iv) construction and equipping of a new common entrance to Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, the Meadowbrook Building, and the new Cancer Center; and (v) acquisition, construction, and equipping of an approximately 69,000 square foot Eating Disorders Institute, including a parking ramp and surface lot with an estimated 220 parking stalls, located at 3525 Monterey Drive in the City. 1.05. All projects to be refinanced with the proceeds of the Series 2009 Bonds are owned by the Obligated Group. Proceeds of the Series 2009 Bonds will also be used to fund one or more reserve funds, pay the costs of issuing the Series 2009 Bonds, and pay other costs related to refunding the Series 2008 Bonds. 1.06. Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and regulations promulgated thereunder, requires that prior to the issuance of the Series 2009 Bonds, the City Council approve the Series 2009 Bonds after conducting a public hearing thereon. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 5 Section 2. Public Hearing. 2.01. Pursuant to the Act and the Code, Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, as Bond Counsel to the City, published a notice of public hearing in the form required by Section 147(f) of the Code in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor, the official newspaper of the City, at least fourteen days prior to the date of the public hearing. The notice of public hearing (the “Notice”), in substantially the form published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor, is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 2.02. Pursuant to the Notice, the City Council shall meet at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, November 16, 2009, to conduct a public hearing on the issuance of the Series 2009 Bonds as requested by the Obligated Group. Section 3. City Council Approvals. 3.01. The City Council hereby ratifies the actions of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, in publishing the Notice in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor. 3.02. The City Council hereby states its preliminary intention to issue the Series 2009 Bonds to (i) refund the outstanding principal amount of the Series 2008 Bonds; (ii) fund one or more reserve funds; (iii) pay the costs of issuing the Series 2009 Bonds; and pay other costs related to refunding the Series 2008 Bonds. The Series 2009 Bonds shall be issued, subject to compliance with the terms and conditions of the Act and the final agreement among the City, the Obligated Group, and the initial purchaser of the Series 2009 Bonds as to the terms and conditions thereof. Section 4. Costs. The Obligated Group will pay the administrative fees of the City and pay, or, upon demand, reimburse the City for payment of, any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the Project and the issuance of the Series 2009 Bonds, whether or not the Series 2009 Bonds are issued. Section 5. Commitment Conditional. The adoption of this Resolution does not constitute a guaranty or firm commitment that the City will issue the Series 2009 Bonds as requested by the Obligated Group. The City retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from participation and accordingly not to issue the Series 2009 Bonds, or issue the Series 2009 Bonds in an amount less than the amount referred to herein, should the City at any time prior to issuance thereof determine that it is in the best interest of the City not to issue the Series 2009 Bonds, or to issue the Series 2009 Bonds in an amount less than the amount referred to in paragraph 1.02 hereof, or should the parties to the transaction be unable to reach agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the documents required for the transaction. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 6 Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 7 EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ISSUANCE OF HEALTH CARE FACILITIES REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS 469.152 THROUGH 469.1651, AS AMENDED NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”), will hold a public hearing on Monday, November 16, 2009, at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, on a proposal that the City approve and authorize the issuance by the City of its revenue refunding bonds, in one or more series under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152-469.1651, as amended (the “Act”), for the benefit of Park Nicollet Health Services, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, Park Nicollet Institute, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, Park Nicollet Clinic, a Minnesota association that has elected to be treated as a nonprofit corporation, PNMC Holdings, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, and Park Nicollet Health Care Products, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (collectively, the “Obligated Group”). The revenue bonds proposed to be issued by the City for the benefit of the Obligated Group (the “Refunding Bonds”) will be applied to refund the outstanding principal amount of the (i) Variable Rate Demand Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2008A (the “Series 2008A Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $41,830,000; (ii) Variable Rate Demand Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2008B-1 (the “Series 2008B-1 Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $57,645,000; and (iii) Variable Rate Demand Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2008B-2 (the “Series 2008B-2 Bonds,” and collectively with the Series 2008B-1 Bonds, the “Series 2008B Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $45,400,000. Proceeds of the Series 2008A Bonds were loaned to the Obligated Group and applied by the Obligated Group to redeem and prepay the outstanding principal amount of the Health Care Facilities Revenue Refunding Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2007A (the “Series 2007A Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $41,600,000. Proceeds of the Series 2007A Bonds were previously loaned to the Obligated Group and applied by the Obligated Group to redeem and prepay outstanding principal amount of the Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2003B (the “Series 2003B Bonds”), issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $41,550,000. The proceeds of the Series 2003B Bonds were used to finance: (i) the construction and equipping of the Obligated Group’s Heart and Vascular Center at Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital located at 6500 Excelsior Boulevard in the City, the construction of a parking ramp and other improvements at Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, the construction of public infrastructure improvements with respect to the foregoing, and the acquisition and installation of equipment for Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital; Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 8 and (ii) the acquisition and installation of a computed tomography scanner (“CT Scanner”) at the facilities of the Obligated Group located at 14000 Fairview Drive in the City of Burnsville, Minnesota, a CT Scanner at the facilities of the Obligated Group located at 15800 95th Avenue North in the City of Maple Grove, Minnesota, and a CT Scanner and a magnetic resonance imaging scanner (“MRI Scanner”) at the facilities of the Obligated Group located at 250 North Central Avenue in the City of Wayzata, Minnesota. Proceeds of the Series 2008B Bonds were loaned to the Obligated Group and applied by the Obligated Group to redeem and prepay the outstanding principal amount of the (i) Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2007B-1, issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $56,595,000 (the “Series 2007B-1 Bonds”); and (ii) Health Care Facilities Revenue Bonds (Park Nicollet Health Services), Series 2007B-1, issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of $44,575,000 (the “Series 2007B-2 Bonds,” and collectively with the Series 2007B-1 Bonds, the “Series 2007B Bonds”). Proceeds of the Series 2007B Bonds were loaned to the Obligated Group to finance the (i) acquisition, construction, and equipping of an approximately 82,000 square foot building to house the Obligated Group’s Cancer Center and related facilities with approximately 31,000 square feet of the building reserved for future expansion, located at 6490 Excelsior Boulevard in the City; (ii) acquisition, construction, and equipping of a new parking ramp including approximately 1,700 parking stalls adjacent to the Cancer Center; (iii) redesign and renovation of the emergency center at Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital located at 6500 Excelsior Boulevard in the City; (iv) construction and equipping of a new common entrance to Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, the Meadowbrook Building, and the new Cancer Center; and (v) acquisition, construction, and equipping of an approximately 69,000 square foot Eating Disorders Institute, including a parking ramp and surface lot with an estimated 220 parking stalls, located at 3525 Monterey Drive in the City. All projects to be refinanced with the proceeds of the Refunding Bonds are owned by the Obligated Group. Proceeds of the Refunding Bonds will also be used to fund one or more reserve funds, pay the costs of issuing the Refunding Bonds, and pay other costs related to refunding the Series 2008A Bonds and the Series 2008B Bonds. At the public hearing, the City Council will consider adoption of a resolution approving the issuance of the Refunding Bonds. The aggregate face amount of the Refunding Bonds proposed to be issued to finance the Project is presently estimated not to exceed $215,000,000. The Refunding Bonds will be issued by the City and will constitute limited obligations of the City payable solely from the revenues expressly pledged to the payment thereof, and will not constitute a general or moral obligation of the City and will not be secured by the taxing power of the City or any assets or property of the City except interests in the Project that may be granted to the City in conjunction with this financing. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 9 QUESTIONS: Contact Kevin Locke at 952-924-2580. HOW TO COMMENT: Attend the meeting and you will be heard or submit written comments. Dated: October 29, 2009 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA Nancy J. Stroth, City Clerk AUXILIARY AIDES FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST AT LEAST 96 HOURS IN ADVANCE. TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS CONTACT THE CLERK’S OFFICE AT 952-924-2505. Published: October 29, 2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 10 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 11 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4d) Page 12 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 4e Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Vendor Claims. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Accept for filing Vendor Claims for the period October 17 through October 30, 2009. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: The Finance Department prepares this report on a monthly basis for Council’s review. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: Vendor Claims Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 1Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,890.00INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING10,000 LAKES CHAPTER 1,890.00 765.00INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING10,000 LAKES CHAPTER ICC 765.00 111.64PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYA-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC 196.33STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 307.97 53.57STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEAAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT 53.57 3,862.50CABLE TV G & A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTAAA-LICENSE DIVISION 3,862.50 22.14PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY INC 22.14 413.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESABRAKADOODLE 413.00 3,934.25SAMPLINGGENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESAECOM INC 6,657.50STUDIESGENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10,591.75 1,198.56OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESALEX AIR APPARATUS INC 1,198.56 1,500.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSALLDATA 1,500.00 256.01INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDINGAMERICAN BUILDING CONTRACTORS 256.01 59.07PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYAMERICAN TIRE DISTRIBUTORS 59.07 87.09GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESAMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER 142.24PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 89.84PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 145.10ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 2 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 2Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 133.29VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 34.37WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 34.37SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 666.30 1,023.17PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIESANCHOR PAPER CO 15.23NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 1,038.40 415.13GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHERAPPLIANCE SMART 415.13 171.25VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSAPWA 171.25 41,568.90TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEARBOR BARBER INC 41,568.90 1,000.002008A UTIL REV BOND PROJECT RENTAL BUILDINGSARCA MINNESOTA INC 1,000.00 112.67PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYASPEN EQUIPMENT CO 112.67 272,263.05CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIASTECH 16,000.00CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 288,263.05 31.85COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONEAT&T 31.85 47.40NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBARTELL, JAN 47.40 80.00PATROLTRAININGBCA - BTS 80.00 2.75ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESBIRNO, RICK 267.85ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 270.60 522.00EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A HEALTH INSURANCEBLUE PRINT FOR HEALTH Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 3 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 3Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 522.00 12,000.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBNSF RAILWAY COMPANY 12,000.00 8,056.50ESCROWSBOLTON & MENK INC 8,056.50 296.66PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYBOYER TRUCK PARTS 296.66 378.79ALLEY MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESBRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 378.79 3,681.51DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE 3,681.51 15,800.74DISCOUNT LOAN PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCENTER ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT 5,620.64GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 660.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM SERVICES/MRKTG OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 11,250.00TRANSFORMATION LOAN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 33,331.38 67.80GO BONDS-FIRE STATIONS G&A HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY 67.80 188.66FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN 5,129.28ENTERPRISE G & A HEATING GAS 5,317.94 205.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCERTIFIED PLUMBING INC 205.00 66.92-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK 15.01ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 65.24ADMINISTRATION G & A POSTAGE 235.59ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE 6.44HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES 232.87HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 100.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 45.67HUMAN RESOURCES CITE 1,060.91COMM & MARKETING G & A TELEPHONE Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 4 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 4Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 299.51DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES 352.77APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICE OFFICE EQUIPMENT 610.00ASSESSING G & A TRAINING 245.98FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 426.15PLUMBING MTCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 400.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAINING 2,445.54Justice Assistance Grant -2005 SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 15.63OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES 933.15OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 198.08OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 214.53OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS 254.00OPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 905.66OPERATIONSTRAINING 54.10INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 89.53-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 8.33ORGANIZED REC G & A POSTAGE 16.09SOCCERGENERAL SUPPLIES 568.28HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 13.22OFF-LEASH DOG PARK GENERAL SUPPLIES 125.00ENVIRONMENTAL G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 222.05BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS GENERAL SUPPLIES 319.12WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 508.51HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIES 47.70BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 439.88CABLE TV G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 289.59TV PRODUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES 11,518.15 159.95NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES DATACOMMUNICATIONSCOMCAST 159.95 3,428.15EMERGENCY REPAIR GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP S 3,428.15 21,200.00COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM 21,200.00 39.05POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESCUB FOODS 155.83POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES 194.88 491.63WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESDAKOTA SUPPLY GROUP Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 5 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 5Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 491.63 2,664.92GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYDALCO ENTERPRISES INC 2,826.70GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES OTHER 10.87BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 5,502.49 2,702.31OFFICE EQUIPMENT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIDAMON FARBER ASSOCIATES 2,702.31 240.00GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDELL, ED 240.00 5,471.06EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A UNEMPLOYMENTDEPT EMPLOYMENT & ECONOMIC DEV 5,471.06 4,146.51INSPECTIONS G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTSDEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY 4,146.51 71,320.00WIRELESS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDIRT WORX 71,320.00 422.69SWEEPINGEQUIPMENT PARTSDISCOUNT STEEL INC 422.69 1,154.37PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC 284.78UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 1,439.15 1,560.40POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC 1,560.40 263.86ELECTRICAL SYSTEM MTCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEDYMANYK ELECTRIC INC 263.86 1,901.27BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESECOLAB INC 1,901.27 35.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSEDUCATION & ORGANIZATION DEVEL 35.00 421.50WIRING REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESEGAN COMPANIES INC Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 6 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 6Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 421.50 5,510.00UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSEIDE INDUSTRIES INC 5,510.00 212.20INSPECTIONS G & A BUILDINGELDER-JONES BUILDING PERMIT SE 212.20 1,321.27ADMINISTRATION G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGELECTION SYSTEMS & SOFTWARE IN 1,321.27 27.60INSPECTIONS G & A TRAININGELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY 27.60 431.90PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT & SERV 431.90 34,130.07SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS RECYCLING SERVICEEUREKA RECYCLING 34,130.07 750.00ESCROWSBROOKSIDE TRAFFIC STUDYEVERLAST PROPERTIES 750.00 1,502.93PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO 12.11VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,515.04 46.93BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESFASTENAL COMPANY 46.93 193.45OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESFIRE EQUIPMENT SPECIALTIES INC 193.45 8,538.60NETWORK SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENTFOURTHSTREET SYSTEMS 8,538.60 120.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS PROGRAM REVENUEFRANK, CHRISTINE 120.00 694.69PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGARELICK STEEL CO 694.69 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 7 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 7Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 111.71BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALSGERTNER, DARYL 111.71 74.98NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGIRARD, STEVE 74.98 1,849.57SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIESGLS SPORTS EQUIPMENT EXPERTS 2,053.26YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 3,902.83 1,022.28WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 1,022.28 192.04SPECIAL PROJECTS GENERAL SUPPLIESGRAINGER INC, WW 192.04 942.66WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGREEN HORIZONS 942.66 600.00APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICE COMPUTER SERVICESGREEN, HOWARD R COMPANY 600.00 19,839.90PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYHARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC 19,839.90 8,292.29WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESHAWKINS INC 8,292.29 127.25ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESHEDBERG AGGREGATES 69.26STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 196.51 484.82NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES COMPUTER SERVICESHENNEPIN COUNTY INFO TECH 1,904.00POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,388.82 8,240.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENNEPIN COUNTY SENTENCING TO 8,240.00 1,641.71POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFFS ACCTG 1,641.71 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 8 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 8Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,192.51POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 1,192.51 453.96WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSHIRT JR, CHARLES 453.96 825.00SOFTBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHISLOP, DANIEL 258.00-EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTS 567.00 83.70HALLOWEEN PARTY CONCESSION SUPPLIESHOLM, MARCIA 83.70 23.35INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 56.52PAINTINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 107.96SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,083.80PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 141.73WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 32.57REILLY BUDGET EQUIPMENT PARTS 39.62REILLY BUDGET BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 19.03SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 9.66SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 8.44SEWER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 36.48STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 50.39STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS 1,609.55 135.45HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SRVCS 135.45 405.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, JEFFREY 405.00 290.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, KRISTINE 290.00 1,576.35EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESI.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 1,576.35 45.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSIATN 45.00 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 9 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 9Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 3,447.10PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEIKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 3,447.10 1,154.95CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESIMPLEX.NET INC 1,154.95 244.28FACILITY OPERATIONS TELEPHONEINTEGRA TELECOM 244.28 317.82SKATING RINK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESINTL SECURITY PRODUCTS 317.82 104.40PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYINVER GROVE FORD 104.40 71.80PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESJ & F REDDY RENTS 56.11WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 127.91 5.41PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYJERRY'S MIRACLE MILE 5.41 44.15HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIESJOHNSON, DICK 44.15 330.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESJOHNSON, SUSAN 330.00 687,610.002008A UTIL REV BOND PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURESJORGENSON CONSTRUCTION INC 687,610.00 25,000.25ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKASSA CONSTRUCTION, RON 380.00CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 25,380.25 2,325.95STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIKATRINA'S GARDENS 2,325.95 235.13SWEEPINGEQUIPMENT PARTSLANO EQUIPMENT INC 235.13 110.35ELECTRICAL SYSTEM MTCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESLARSON, JH CO Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 10 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 10Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 110.35 35.05WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATLAUMANN, JOHN 180.40WATER UTILITY G&A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 215.45 2,352.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESLAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES 2,352.00 6,636.00EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A League of MN Cities dept'l expLEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 6,636.00 1,125.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSLEAGUE OF MN CITIES 1,125.00 2,092.80UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSLEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE 2,092.80 112.53WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSLEONARD, DANA 112.53 225.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM SERVICES/MRKTG OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLEVIN ARCHITECTS, CHARLES 225.00 430.61POSTAL SERVICES COMPUTER SERVICESLOGIS 80,500.00APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICE COMPUTER SERVICES 5,098.00NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES COMPUTER SERVICES 2,022.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACE G&A OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 364.68APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENT 7,220.88NETWORK SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENT 95,636.17 793.71SPEC ASSMT CONSTRUCTION CURRENTLYNCH, SANDRA 793.71 177.00SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMAPLE CREST LANDSCAPE 177.00SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 177.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 177.00SSD #4 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 708.00 13.80-PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESMENARDS Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 11 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 11Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 19.51-PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 5.94-WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 119.28HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIES 80.03 11,547.85SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSMETHODIST HOSPITAL 11,547.85 261.00POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMETRO SALES INC 19,484.36TECHNOLOGY REPLACE G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 19,745.36 930.75PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMICHELS CORPORATION 930.75 1,340.96DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENTMICRO CENTER 1,340.96 830.00POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMID AMERICA BUSINESS SYSTEMS 5,138.47DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 5,968.47 310.74PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESMIDWEST ASPHALT CORP 633.14STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 943.88 2,005.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESMIDWEST TESTING LLC 2,005.00 1,547.73EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSMINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CT 1,547.73 525.002008A UTIL REV BOND PROJECT RENTAL BUILDINGSMINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG 525.00 974.87PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYMINT CONDITION DETAILING 974.87 1,059.57PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIESMINUTEMAN PRESS 1,059.57 135.43PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIESMIRACLE RECREATION EQUIPMENT I Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 12 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 12Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 135.43 50.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATMN FALL MAINTENANCE EXPO 50.00 4,084.77ACCIDENT REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMORRIE'S BODYWORKS 4,084.77 61.01PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYMTI DISTRIBUTING CO 61.01 535.00WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIMVTL LABORATORIES 535.00 55.47GROUNDS MTCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO) 17.39ROUTINE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,585.98PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORY 17.94PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 88.04PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 35.74GENERAL REPAIR SMALL TOOLS 11.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 2,811.56 921.26STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICENEENAH FOUNDREY 921.26 750.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWNEGA, GOITOM 750.00 79.63ADMINISTRATION G & A TELEPHONENEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 207.99HUMAN RESOURCES TELEPHONE 332.51RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT TELEPHONE 72.63ASSESSING G & A TELEPHONE 123.69FINANCE G & A TELEPHONE 268.09EDA / HA REIMBURSEMENT TELEPHONE 1,221.85POLICE G & A TELEPHONE 550.68OPERATIONSTELEPHONE 72.63INSPECTIONS G & A TELEPHONE 262.46ENGINEERING G & A TELEPHONE 424.39PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TELEPHONE 142.81PARK AND REC G&A TELEPHONE 332.02ORGANIZED REC G & A TELEPHONE Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 13 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 13Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 321.72PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONE 72.63ENVIRONMENTAL G & A TELEPHONE 301.19WESTWOOD G & A TELEPHONE 72.63REC CENTER/AQUATIC PARK SAL TELEPHONE 73.53VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A TELEPHONE 402.46WATER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 114.41SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 38.89SOLID WASTE G&A TELEPHONE 5,488.84 13,368.48WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESNORTHERN WATER WORKS SUPPLY 13,368.48 83.29BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESNORTHLAND ALUMINUM PRODUCTS 83.29 800.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICENORTHWESTERN DOOR CO 2,900.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 3,700.00 11.44NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESNORTON, PAM 11.44 170.50WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAROESTREICH, MARK 170.50 20.77ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT 57.30HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES 110.28DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 15.99ASSESSING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 71.09FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 303.31GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 174.91POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 223.49NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OFFICE SUPPLIES 12.22NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 79.09PATROLOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 23.15COP SHOP OFFICE SUPPLIES 179.85INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,271.45 776.80INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESOFFICE TEAM 776.80 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 14 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 14Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 64.13ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSEON SITE SANITATION 181.69OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 53.44SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 299.26 2,500.00ESCROWSBROOKSIDE TRAFFIC STUDYPAENTEAU CONSTRUCTION 2,500.00 234.15PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESPARTS ASSOCIATES INC 234.15 91.70PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYPARTS PLUS 91.70 150.00HOLIDAY PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPARTY UNIT 150.00 385.00SOCCEROTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPENKERT, JEREMY 385.00 15,332.99COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGPERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC 15,332.99 23.76POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEPETTY CASH 20.16OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 16.89OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 9.64PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN BUDGET OFFICE SUPPLIES 27.29PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 10.70PUBLIC WORKS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 20.98PUBLIC WORKS G & A MEETING EXPENSE 20.00TRAININGTRAVEL/MEETINGS 20.25ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 25.00ENGINEERING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 20.35PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A MEETING EXPENSE 21.24TRAFFIC CONTROL GENERAL SUPPLIES 19.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LICENSES 10.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MOTOR FUELS 52.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES 18.00SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES 335.26 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 15 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 15Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 74.00BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESPLANTRA INC 74.00 1,046.38PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYPOMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 1,046.38 5,500.00COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGEPOSTMASTER - PERMIT #603 207.44WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 207.44SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 207.44SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE 207.44STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 6,329.76 4,254.69TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEPRECISION LANDSCAPE & TREE 4,254.69 4,365.00PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIPROGRESSIVE CONSULTING ENGINEE 4,365.00 131.20WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEQUALITY RESTORATION SERVICES I 3,305.60STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 3,436.80 55.61VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGEQUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER 55.61 70.99FACILITY OPERATIONS TELEPHONEQWEST 1,811.11COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONE 524.00COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL DATACOMMUNICATIONS 2,406.10 93.42ICE RESURFACER BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESR & R SPECIALTIES 93.42 372.52NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRAATZ, DAVID 372.52 8,672.91TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICERAINBOW TREECARE 2,491.40TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 11,164.31 450.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM SERVICES/MRKTG OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESREHKAMP LARSON ARCHITECTS INC Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 16 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 16Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 450.00 47.29NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEESRICOH AMERICAS CORP 47.29 5,000.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTRIGHT MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS I 5,000.00 179.42PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYRIGID HITCH INC 179.42 6,644.07WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRMR SERVICES 6,644.07 54.02PATCHING-PERMANENT EQUIPMENT PARTSRMS RENTALS 54.02 55.45PUBLIC WORKS G & A MEETING EXPENSEROHLIK, CHAR 55.45 750.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWROSENBERG, BRUCE & LESLIE 750.00 50.00OPERATIONSTRAININGSAFE KIDS WORLDWIDE 50.00 420.94BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESSCAN AIR FILTER INC 420.94 1,479.87PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO. 1,479.87 67.34-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSSCHWAAB INC 1,046.85INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING 979.51 308.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSEH 308.00 58.73PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESSEVEN CORNERS ACE HDWE 58.73 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 17 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 17Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 29,862.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICESIMPSON CO INC, M.E. 29,862.00 60.48PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSKB ENVIRONMENTAL 60.48 1,583.72EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESSLP ASSOC OF FIREFIGHTERS #993 1,583.72 26.27HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENTSONGLE, LISA 26.27 115.86YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIESSPARTAN GROUP LLC 115.86 160.00GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESPEEDY KEYS 160.00 81.89BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESSPS COMPANIES INC 81.89 174.05GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESUBURBAN CHEVROLET 174.05 410.55PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYSUBURBAN GM PARTS 410.55 6,813.75REILLY BUDGET GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESSUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC 6,813.75 121.56ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS 715.00SUNSET RIDGE LEGAL NOTICES 836.56 633.78GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESUPERIOR FORD 633.78 225.00WATER UTILITY G&A TRAININGSUSA 225.00 665.00SOCCEROTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSWANSON, JORDAN 665.00 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 18 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 18Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 53.30POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESTARGET BANK 18.72POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES 51.47NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 5.99SUPPORT SERVICES OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 20.46SCHOOL GROUPS GENERAL SUPPLIES 149.94 27.09ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTELELANGUAGE INC 27.09 393.77BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICETENNANT SALES AND SERVICE CO. 393.77 97.00BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICETERMINIX INT 48.27WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 145.27 17.00OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESTEXA TONKA TAILORING 17.00 25,000.00ESCROWSBROOKSIDE TRAFFIC STUDYTHOMPSON, LINDA 25,000.00 39.20HALLOWEEN PARTY PROGRAM REVENUETHOR, SAYCHAY 39.20 377.50ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL 377.50 6,635.52ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICESTKDA 2,066.33SEWER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 8,701.85 200.00WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSTORRES, FERNANDO 200.00 540.00COUNTS AND STUDIES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAFFIC DATA INC 540.00 225.00MOVE-UP PROGRAM SERVICES/MRKTG OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTREHUS 225.00 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 19 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 19Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 176.39GROUNDS MTCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSTRUGREEN CHEMLAWN 176.39 1,890.39PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTWIN CITY HARDWARE 1,890.39 1,062.75POLICE G & A REPAIRSUHL CO INC 1,062.75 370.65EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA 370.65 225.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA REGIST 225.00 202.05REILLY BUDGET EQUIPMENT PARTSUSA BLUE BOOK 202.05 84.65OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESVALLEY NATIONAL GASES WV LLC 9.94SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 94.59 129,669.01CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIVALLEY PAVING INC 129,669.01 2,600.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEVOEHL CONSTRUCTION INC 2,600.00 11,856.00SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEVOEHL EXCAVATING INC 11,856.00 172.37GRANTSOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWASTE MANAGEMENT 955.24SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,127.61 442.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWASTE TECHNOLOGY INC 315.00REILLY BUDGET BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 757.00 8,023.20WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEWATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC 8,023.20 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 20 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 20Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 55.58PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESWAYTEK 55.58 2,891.78SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEWEBER ELECTRIC 6,746.84SEWER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 9,638.62 23.19PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYWHEELER'S AUTOBODY SUPPLY 1.49-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 21.70 143.51OPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESSWINDSCHITL, MARK 143.51 21.87OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY 26,449.18PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 4,577.18PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 20.38BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE 66.06WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE 34,051.07WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,757.84REILLY BUDGET ELECTRIC SERVICE 3,009.56SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 637.43STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 70,590.57 41,516.81NETWORK SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENTXIOTECH CORP 41,516.81 18,225.00UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSXTERIOR XPERTS 18,225.00 86.45OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESYAEKEL, DANIEL 86.45 2,061.48SPECIAL PROJECTS BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESZAHL-PETROLEUM MAINTENANCE CO 2,061.48 62.46PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 62.46PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 170.90WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 62.46VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 21 10/28/2009CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:11:39R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 21Page -Council Check Summary 10/30/2009 -10/17/2009 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 358.28 26.61HALLOWEEN PARTY GENERAL SUPPLIESZEMBRYKI, MARK 26.61 24.23PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH INVENTORYZIEGLER INC 24.23 Report Totals 2,018,054.62 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 4e)Page 22 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 4f City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Minutes – September 15, 2009 Westwood Room, City Hall I. Call to Order Chair Morgan called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. A. Roll Call Commissioners Present: Tony Deos, Bill Gavzy, Alison Knoche Prosser, Sharon Lyon, Stuart Morgan, Jeff Mueller, Jonathan Awasom and Shelley T Weier Staff: Marney Olson, Lt. Lori Dreier and Amy Stegora-Peterson Guests: Jan Kleinman and Ellen Kennedy, University of Minnesota Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies Welcome to new commissioner Alison Knoche Prosser and guests. B. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved with the addition of Human Rights Award to the Community Involvement section. C. Approval of Minutes It was moved by Commissioner Lyon, seconded by Commissioner Gavzy, to approve the minutes of August 18, 2009, with a date change in the heading. The motion passed 8-0. II. Divestment Presentation – guest Ellen Kennedy Ms. Kennedy discussed how she became aware of and involved with the issues of genocide after visiting Rwanda and having it greatly impact her. It compelled her to make a difference and form the Genocide Network of Minnesota, a non-profit group. Genocide has been occurring over and over and most recently in Darfur. She is working now speaking with cities about making a statement to representatives about doing something on a global level. One way to make a statement is through divestment of funds from businesses that contribute to countries where this is occurring. She presented packets to commissioners that included divestment statistics and resolutions that have been approved by other Minnesota cities (Minneapolis, St. Paul, Hopkins, Edina). The goal is to have these companies change their policies. The Genocide Intervention Network in DC puts together the list of companies. Commissioners asked questions, including what other recommendations Ms. Kennedy would have for the countries where this is occurring. Ms. Kennedy suggested they would advocate for diplomatic sanctions, loss of UN seats, exclusion from other International bodies, and eliminating communication-jamming systems. Anything short of “boots on the ground.” Meeting of November 2 (Item No. 4f) Page 2 Ms. Olson stated staff could research a resolution process and look into the investment and administration questions. Commissioners present supported the idea of divestment of companies investing in Sudan and requested staff do further research and consider the possibility of recommending the City Council approve a resolution. Ms. Olson stated she would bring information to the Commission at the October meeting for further discussion. III. Commissioner and Committee Reports A. Individual commissioner and staff reports Ms. Olson stated Ada Alden from the League of Human Rights had contacted her to indicate that the Commission is looking for Board members. Contact Ms. Olson if you would like more information. The City of Hopkins will be hosting a dinner for an Iraqi delegation that will be in Minnesota for a sister city agreement with the City of Minneapolis. The dinner will be September 29th and she would send more information via Email. Chair Morgan reported he attended the last Police Advisory Commission meeting and learned a lot. They were planning a golf tournament to raise funds. IV. Community Involvement A. Fire Department Open House – October 6th Ms. Olson indicated the Fire Department would be holding an open house on October 6th from 5-8 PM. If there is interest, the HRC can host a booth and distribute information. B. Human Rights Award Lt. Dreier stated that now is the time to begin advertising for applicants. V. Sub Committees Finalize members for the film and outreach subcommittees and discuss sub committee goals. Film sub-committee members are Commissioner Morgan, Sivriver and Deos. They will work to select a film to be shown in March or April. Commissioner Awasom suggested the film Freedom Writer. Meeting of November 2 (Item No. 4f) Page 3 Outreach and Diversity Lens sub-committee members are Commissioners Lyon, Awasom ad Deos. Sandy Johnson will also help. This group will work on creating literature and a presentation for the Diversity Lens and also identify groups to present to. Ms. Olson stated the HRC would hold a joint meeting with CEAC (Community Education Advisory Council) in November. She will keep all commissioners updated on the sub- committee meetings. IV. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:11 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy L. Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 4g OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA October 7, 2009--6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Larry Shapiro MEMBERS ABSENT: Andrew Ford (youth member) STAFF PRESENT: Adam Fulton, Greg Hunt, Meg McMonigal, Nancy Sells, Sean Walther 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Minutes: August 19, 2009 Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend approval of the minutes of August 19, 2009. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. 3. Other Business A. Modification of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District Plan – Resolution No. 81 Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator, presented the staff report. Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend approval of Resolution No. 81 finding the proposed Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the Modification of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District Plan conforms to the Comprehensive Plan of the City of St. Louis Park. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. 4. Hearings A. Hotel Proposal – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Location: 600 Highway 169 Applicant: CSM/BPG Properties Case Nos.: 09-18-S & 09-19-PUD Meeting of November 2 (Item No. 4g) Page 2 Adam Fulton, Planner, presented the staff report for a new hotel in the Shelard Park area and reviewed the subdivision variances for the easements and sidewalks. He stated that 51 surface parking spaces are available, which is a surplus. The hotel site will be brought into compliance for stormwater management. Landscaping alternatives have been requested including public spaces, public seating and hardscape landscaping. Trees are being added to every possible portion of the site. The site is adjacent to Shelard Park, which was in the master plan to serve the whole area. The park impacts the DORA (Designed Outdoor Recreation Area) calculation and the park dedication. The park dedication occurred when this area was previously platted. Through the PUD process the applicant is allowed a DORA reduction of half. Mr. Fulton noted that the request is scheduled to go before the City Council on November 2nd. Commissioner Morris asked for clarification about the utility easement variance. Mr. Fulton replied the variance was requested due to some existing site conditions, which would create a hardship to put in those easements. He explained the easement to the south of Lot 1 abuts right up against the property and an easement for drainage and utility can’t be put into the parking ramp. Similarly at the hotel property, because of the conditions that exist with the turnaround circle, it is not possible to add the full 10-foot easement, but they were putting in a 5-foot utility and drainage easement. Mr. Fulton stated that staff felt the easements were not necessary for drainage or utilities. Chair Kramer asked about the crossing and if the entire parking ramp would empty past that area or would it just be the surface lot? Mr. Fulton replied it was just the surface lot. There is also access from the frontage road to the lot. John Ferrier, CSM Corporation, introduced the development team. He said the team agreed with the findings of the staff report. Commissioner Morris stated the Planning Commission had an opportunity to review this item at a study session which was very helpful and eliminated a lot of questions the Commission might normally ask at a public hearing. Chair Kramer opened the public hearing. Sandra Huber, 330 Ford Road, #8, asked about the turnaround on Ford Road. Mr. Fulton replied there would be a new turnaround to the north of the 600 Tower. Staff looked at the traffic and when they looked at the hotel use, it was off-peak use from the office. Meeting of November 2 (Item No. 4g) Page 3 Kelly Gibbel, owner BPG Properties, discussed the turnaround and believed Ms. Huber was referring to a turnaround at the 300 Building, which was not a part of this project. It would not be the same type of drive. It was basically a one-way drop off. Ms. Huber expressed concerns about additional traffic and crime in the area and potential for car break-ins. She said it was hard to get in and out of the condo development with additional traffic. Jerry Kern, 1155 Ford Rd, #316, stated he supported development of the five-star hotel, but was disappointed that the Santorini site was not being redeveloped. He commented that the hotel proposal would make that quadrant a lot nicer and he thought it was terrific and would increase local property values. He said he liked to see progress in the area. Nadia Ablamunets, 1155 Ford Road, #510, asked if anything was proposed at the Santorini site. Mr. Fulton replied that site was not part of this application. Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, added there had been several development discussions on the Santorini site, but there were no proposals currently. Ms. Ablamunets said she was concerned about the project obstructing views and being able to see people in the hotel. Chair Kramer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Robertson said he felt the Commission had reviewed this thoroughly at a study session and he felt it was a strong project. Commissioner Johnston-Madison indicated she understood the concerns about traffic. She said she felt in the long run, the traffic impact would be less than anticipated. She felt it was a good project. Commissioner Carper stated he believed this was a good process and he thanked staff for their work. He said revisions had been made based on the preliminary discussions, which made it easier to approve at this time. Commissioner Person asked if the sidewalk along the service road would be constructed as part of the project or if it would be postponed. Mr. Fulton replied the sidewalk would be up to the north edge of the hotel property and down to the Santorini site. Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat with subdivision variances and Preliminary PUD, subject to conditions recommended by staff. Meeting of November 2 (Item No. 4g) Page 4 Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. 5. Other Business (continued) B. Active Living Presentation Sean Walther, Senior Planner, spoke about the city’s involvement with the Active Living Hennepin Communities initiative. He explained that through policy and planning, the initiative asks how do we build a place where walking, biking, and using transit is more of a way of life and gets physical activity into the daily routine. Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about city streets lacking pedestrian walkways. Mr. Walther said the city has identified priority intersections to be improved for a citywide network. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked when that work would happen and how the Commission could help that process. Mr. Walther replied much of that has happened through the Comprehensive Plan neighborhood planning process. More specific concerns will be raised at the next round of neighborhood planning meetings. Chair Kramer spoke about congestion and walking and biking, commenting that inevitably there are wide, unattractive, busy roads to cross. Ms. McMonigal spoke about the complete streets concept. She said the recent street renovation of the Lyndale neighborhood in Minneapolis is an example of this concept. 6. Communications 7. Adjournment Commissioner Morris made a motion to adjourn. Commissioner Shapiro seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. The meeting was adjourned 7:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 4h ST. LOUIS PARK CHARTER COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT Calendar Year Ending December 31, 2008 The St. Louis Park Charter Commission is active and met twice in 2008. The Charter Commission reviewed the City’s Charter in September 2008 and asked the St. Louis Park City Council to prepare two minor amendments to the City’s Charter. The City Council unanimously passed the amendments in December 2008 and the revised Charter will be effective March 25, 2009. Charter Review The Charter Commission held elections for officers at its annual meeting on May 10, 2008 and elected new officers. Commissioner Steve Fillbrandt was re-elected to the position of Chair, Commissioner Brian Fiderlein was re-elected to the position of Vice Chair, and Commissioner Janice Loftus was re-elected to the position of Secretary. Charter Commissioner John Orenstein resigned from his position in October, 2008. New Commissioners appointed in 2008 were Nathan Prosser, Terry Dwyer, Brittney Turner, and Jon (JC) Beckstrand, resulting in a full complement of Commissioners for 2009. At the Charter Commission meeting on September 10, 2008, Charter Commissioners unanimously voted to recommend that the City Council pass an ordinance amending Sections 3.10 and 5.06 of the St. Louis Park City Charter. The Charter Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed changes at the request of City staff and the City Attorney for the following reasons: ƒ Section 3.10 requires the city to recodify the City Code every ten years. The City Clerk’s office updates the Code whenever ordinances are adopted, amended or repealed in a timely manner and keeps these records electronically. While this section may have been needed in earlier years, with electronic recordkeeping, this section is not necessary. ƒ Section 5.06 requires the City Council to award contracts to the lowest responsible bidder. In recent years, the State Legislature has amended contract laws to include best value contracting, which considers other factors than just price. For the city to use best value contracting, this section needed to be amended. On November 17, 2008, Council held the public hearing and approved first reading of the ordinance without change. Council set second reading of the ordinance for December 1, 2008. At the December 1, 2008 meeting, Council moved the second reading of the ordinance to the December 15, 2008 Council meeting because all seven Council members needed to be present to approve the second reading. The Council unanimously approved the amendments at their December 15 meeting and the amendments will go into effect on March 25, 2009. Respectfully Submitted: Steve Fillbrandt, Chair Marcia Honold, Staff Liaison 2715 Huntington Ave S City of St. Louis Park St. Louis Park MN 55416 5005 Minnetonka Blvd 952-926-0596 St. Louis Park MN 55416 (952) 924-2651 Meeting of November 2 (Item No. 4h) Page 2 CHARTER COMMISSION 2008 ATTENDANCE ROSTER Members Appointed Term Expires May 14 Sept. 10 Steve Fillbrandt, Chair 4-29-03 1-22-10 P P Brian Fiderlein, Vice-Chair 3-22-01 3-12-09 P P Janice Loftus, Secretary 3-1-02 3-1-10 P P Jon (JC) Beckstrand 2-6-08 1-30-12 P P Gary Carlson 10-6-06 10-2-10 P P Lynne Carper 4-29-03 10-4-08 P P Jim de Lambert 1-3-06 3-14-09 P P Terry Dwyer 2-18-08 2-12-12 P P Ken Gothberg 10-6-06 6-19-11 P Ae Marilyn Hoeft 3-1-02 3-1-10 P Ae Linda Jennings 3-1-02 3-1-10 P P Jim Kelly 10-6-06 10-18-10 P P John Orenstein* 9-13-04 2-22-10 Ae A Pat Skinner 10-6-06 11-21-08 P P Brittney Turner 2-19-08 2-12-12 P P *Resigned from the Charter Commission October 2008 P= Present A= Absent Ae= Absence, Excused N=New Commissioner NOTE: Minnesota Statute Section 410.05 subdivision 2 provides “When any members has failed to perform the duties of office and has failed to attend four consecutive meetings without being excused by the Commission, the Secretary of the Charter Commission shall file a certificate with the court setting forth those facts and the district court shall thereupon make its order of removal. Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 6a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Assessment of Delinquent Utilities, False Alarms, Mowing, Tree Removal/Injection, and Other Miscellaneous Charges RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Levying Assessment and Reassessment for Delinquent Utility Accounts, False Alarm, Mowing, Tree Removal/Injection, and Other Miscellaneous Charges. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to take the necessary action to assess delinquent accounts against the benefited properties in the City? BACKGROUND: After conducting a public hearing, the City Council is authorized to direct the assessment of delinquent utility accounts, false alarms, mowing, tree removal/injection, and other miscellaneous charges against the benefiting property. Accounts remaining delinquent and unpaid at the close of business on November 6, 2009 will be sent to Hennepin County for inclusion with the 2010 property tax bill. This process follows essentially the same schedule each year and is developed to meet Hennepin County’s deadline of November 30, 2009 for submission of the assessment rolls. PROCESS PRIOR TO HEARING: Each of the customers received a City service. Subsequently, the customers were billed through our regular billing process. The invoice(s) is/are now past due, so the recommended method of collecting the past due amounts is through certification to the property taxes for next year. In advance of the public hearing date, individual letters are mailed to property owners, and tenants if applicable, advising them of the assessment and their right to be heard before the City Council. This year, 1,687 letters were sent to customers, as compared to over 1,800 letters last year. Balances past due as of September 22, 2009 are considered delinquent. The total amount delinquent at that time was $753,624 compared to $674,705 in 2008. Each year, we have a number of residents who pay their delinquent amount before the certification deadline, thus reducing the final amount that is certified and sent to the County. In addition, there are several hundred customers who contact the City with questions about their outstanding balance(s), the certification process, or other general questions. As of October 27, 2009, the City has delinquencies totaling $589,363 on 1,220 accounts. Customers have until November 6, 2009 to pay the outstanding amount before the Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6a) Page 2 amount is certified to Hennepin County. The past due amounts do not include interest at 5.85% for thirteen months and a $30.00 per account administrative fee. A copy of the assessment roll is on file with the City Clerk’s office for review. At this time, the Finance Department has not received notice that anyone wants to speak at the Public Hearing. However, Finance has received one letter and will contact the customer before the meeting. In addition, a note without any contact information was received; therefore, Finance will try to gather contact information and speak with the customer. NEXT STEPS: Staff will continue to collect payments related to the delinquent accounts and work with residents to resolve issues related to their delinquent accounts. All delinquent accounts outstanding as of November 6, 2009 will be certified to Hennepin County for collection. After certification, the delinquent amounts will become a lien on the individual properties. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Timely collection of these charges is vital to the financial stability of our utility systems, keeping rates reasonable and allowing for continued operational and infrastructure needs. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable Attachments: Resident Letter Resolution Assessment Roll (on-file in City Clerks office) Prepared by: Patricia A. Sulander, Accountant Reviewed by: Brian A. Swanson, Finance Manager Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6a) Page 3 Date of Notice: October 9, 2009 Property Owner 1 Mailing Address Mailing City, Mailing State, Mailing Zip RE: Invoice Number: Customer: Service Address : Delinquent Amount: Description: Dear Property Owner 1: The City of St. Louis Park encourages its customers to remain current in the payment of their bills. When accounts become delinquent, according to Minnesota law, they may be certified to Hennepin County to be collected with property taxes payable in the next year. City of St. Louis Park records show this account was delinquent as of October 9, 2009. In an effort to avoid the account from being certified to the property taxes, the City is requesting that payment in full be received at City Hall by Friday, November 6, 2009 at 4:30 p.m. If payment in full is not received by that date and time, the outstanding delinquent amount, plus an administrative charge of $30.00, and interest at a rate of 5.85% for 13 months will be sent to Hennepin County for collection with the property taxes in 2010. The City Council will consider final action on all delinquent accounts at a public hearing during the regular Council meeting on November 2, 2009 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. A written appeal may be presented to the Council at that time or appeals may be made to Brian Swanson – Assistant Finance Director, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416. Please feel free to contact our office at (952) 924-2680 if you have questions regarding this notice. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Brian Swanson Assistant Finance Director Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6a) Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 09-____ LEVYING ASSESSMENT AND REASSESSMENT FOR DELINQUENT UTILITY ACCOUNTS, FALSE ALARM, MOWING, TREE REMOVAL/INJECTION, AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore determined by ordinance the rates and charges for water, sewer, storm water and refuse services of the city and has provided for the abatement of tree removal/injection, grass/weed cutting and other miscellaneous charges to a home or business shall be at the expense of the owners of the premises involved; and WHEREAS, all such sums become delinquent and assessable against the property served under Section 6-158, Section 6-206, Section 9-103, Section 9-110, Section 11-2004 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code and Minnesota Statutes 18.023, 18.271, 443 and 429; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has prepared an assessment roll setting forth an assessment against each tract or parcel of land served by water, sewer, storm water and refuse services of the City or charged for the costs of abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees and other miscellaneous charges which remain unpaid at the close of business on November 6, 2009; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that said assessment roll is hereby adopted and approved, and there is hereby levied and assessed or reassessed against each and every tract of land described therein an assessment in the amounts respectively therein abating water, sewer, storm water , refuse, grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees and other miscellaneous charges which remain unpaid at the close of business on November 6, 2009; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to deliver said assessment or reassessment roll to the Auditor of Hennepin County for collection of the assessment in the same manner as other municipal taxes are collected and payment thereof enforced with interest from the date of this resolution at the rate of five point eight five percent (5.85 %) for thirteen (13) months plus and administrative charge of $30.00 per account. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 6b Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License with Sunday Sales – El GordoUno, Inc. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to consider on-sale intoxicating liquor license with Sunday sales to El GordoUno, Inc. dba El Gordo Mexican Restaurant located at 8140 Highway 7 for the license term through March 1, 2010. If the Council decides to deny the application the motion should be to direct the city attorney to prepare written findings and decision denying the application for consideration at the November 16 council meeting. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Based on the unique background investigation findings of the applicant, does the council feel the applicant meets all criteria necessary for approval of a liquor license? BACKGROUND: The City received an application from El GordoUno, Inc. for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license with Sunday sales operating at 8140 Highway 7. The premise to be licensed consists of a small storefront of approximately 900 square feet located in the Knollwood Mall with seating for approximately 83 people. Baldomero Valenzo Alguizar is the sole officer and the establishment has been in operation by Mr. Alguizar since January 2008 and is open for daily business serving Mexican food. The applicant previously withdrew his first application in August 2008 based on police department concerns with the findings of the background investigation. The applicant was informed that with the passing of time, and when applicant felt it would be appropriate, to apply again for reconsideration of liquor license and be candid and forthright in the application process. On October 19, 2009, the City Council held a Special Study Session to discuss the consideration of Mr. Alguizar’s application for a liquor license. Council requested staff and/or the applicant to provide the following information: ƒ Proof of completion of the applicant’s court mandated rehabilitation ƒ Any documentation regarding the applicant’s sobriety ƒ Copy of the first liquor license application ƒ Copy of the current liquor license application ƒ Copies of all legal convictions ƒ Public Police Records Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b) Page 2 ƒ All records that the applicant wished to submit ƒ Planning Commission consideration of CUP Staff has provided the requested documentation as attachments to this report. History of Liquor Applicant: May 2008 - first application received from Mr. Alguizar for a liquor license. From the findings of the background investigation, the police department concerns included the applicant’s false information regarding convictions and discrepancies in the applicant’s correct name. June 2008 – Police Department and City Clerk staff met to discuss the liquor application and the City Attorney was also consulted for application review. June 25, 2008 - Police Sergeant Garland and City Clerk met with applicant for additional questioning and to discuss aspects of the police background investigation. Applicant indicated to police that he no longer drinks alcohol and completed a brief state mandated rehabilitation following his fourth DWI. June 26, 2008 – Disposition of convictions in which the applicant plead guilty resulted in gross misdemeanors for malicious punishment of a child and interference with a 911 call. The sentence required the applicant to serve two weekends in jail and perform 15 hours of community service. In addition, the applicant was previously convicted in 2000 for a gross misdemeanor of driving when his license was cancelled (IPS) and 4 misdemeanors of driving under the influence (DUI) between 1996 and 2001. July 17, 2008 – Police Chief John Luse recommended denial of this liquor applicant based on the misleading approach to the application process and because the concerns could be collectively viewed to question the “good moral character” of the applicant. With the passing of time, the applicant was told he could apply again and to be candid and forthright in the application process. August 2008 - Mr. Alguizar withdraw his application for a liquor license at 8140 Highway 7. June 30, 2009 - The City Clerk’s office received application for an on-sale intoxicating liquor license from Mr. Alguizar and submitted to the police dept for a background investigation. The findings from the police report are as follows: • Applicant’s legal name appears to be in order since the initial application. • Applicant’s driving history has remained the same with no new violations since January 2005. • Applicant’s criminal history remained the same with no new arrests or charges since December 2007. August 2009 – City Attorney reviewed new application. August 19, 2009 - Planning Commission approved CUP to permit restaurant with liquor at 8140 Highway 7 in C-2 General Commercial District. Final council approval of CUP is required to take place within 120 days of receipt of zoning application and is scheduled as an Action Item on tonight’s agenda. Approval of the CUP is with the condition that the liquor license is approved. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b) Page 3 Council Next Steps and Considerations • Council consideration to approve the liquor license. • City Code Section 3-71 allows Council to attach special conditions to the approval of a liquor license to protect the health, safety, welfare and quietude of the city; and ensure harmony with the location where the business is located. Violation of any of the conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the license. • If the Council does not approve the liquor license, Council must decide if there is enough evidence to deny the liquor license based on the “moral character” of the applicant. Because the applicant was convicted, the Council can weigh this factor in determining if the applicant is of “good moral character”. MN Statutes 364.03 Sub. 2 states that if a conviction is more than one year old, the lapse in time “may” be sufficient evidence of rehabilitation but it is not conclusive evidence. If Council decides not to grant the license because of a conviction, then under MN Statutes 364.05 the applicant must be notified of the following: 1. The grounds and reasons for the denial or disqualification. 2. The applicable complaint and grievance procedure as set forth in MN Statutes 364.06. 3. The earliest date the person may reapply for a license; and 4. That all competent evidence of rehabilitation presented will be considered upon reapplication. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The fees for new liquor licenses are found in Appendix A - Fee Schedule of the City Code. Fees for this applicant include $1,000 of non-refundable new license investigation fee and $7,700 on-sale license with Sunday sales fee (pro-rated). VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 • Includes evidence records of rehabilitation Liquor License Application 2008 Liquor License Application 2009 • Bylaws and Lease Agreement on file in City Clerk’s office Police Investigation Report 2008/2009 City Code Regulations Minnesota Public Criminal History Police Department Case Report • Minnesota Statutes Excerpts from Planning Commission Minutes 8/18/09 (CUP approval) Proposed Resolution approving CUP Agenda Item 8a Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Reviewed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 4 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 5 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 6 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 7 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 8 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 9 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 10 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 11 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 12 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 13 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 14 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 15 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 16 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 17 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 18 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 19 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 20 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 21 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 22 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 23 Applicant Letter to Council dated 10/22/2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 24 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 25 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 26 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 27 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 28 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 29 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 30 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 31 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 32 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 33 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 34 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 35 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 36 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 37 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 38 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 39 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 40 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 41 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 42 El Gordo Uno 2008 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 43 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 44 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 45 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 46 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 47 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 48 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 49 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 50 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 51 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 52 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 53 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 54 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 55 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 56 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 57 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 58 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 59 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 60 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 61 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 62 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 63 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 64 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 65 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 66 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 67 ElGordo Uno 2009 Liquor License Application Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 68 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Report 2008 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 69 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Report 2008 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 70 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Report 2008 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 71 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Report 2008 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 72 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Report 2008 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 73 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Report 2008 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 74 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Report 2008 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 75 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Report 2008 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 76 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Supplement Report 2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 77 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Supplement Report 2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 78 ElGordo Uno Police Investigation Supplement Report 2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 79 City Code Chapter 3 – Alcoholic Beverages Sec. 3-34 Violations. (1) Providing false or misleading statements made on a license application or renewal application, or failure to abide by the commitments, promises or representations made to the city council on a license application. Sec. 3-63 Execution of application It shall be unlawful to make any false statement in an application. Sec. 3-65. Investigations. (a) At the time of making an initial application, renewal application, or request for approval for a new manager, the applicant shall, in writing, authorize the city police department to investigate all facts set out in the application and do a personal background and felony criminal record check on the applicant and store manager. The applicant shall further authorize the police department to release information received from such investigation to the city council. (b) If the city council denies the applicant's request for a license due to the applicant's prior conviction of a crime, the city council shall notify the applicant of the grounds and reasons for the denial; the applicable complaint and grievance procedure as set forth in M.S.A. § 364.06; the earliest date the applicant may reapply for a liquor license; and that all competent evidence of rehabilitation will be considered upon reapplication. Sec. 3-67. Information considered for license approval. In determining whether a new or renewal license under this division shall be granted, the city council shall consider the following in addition to conformity with state statutes and city ordinances: (1) The investigative and staff report submitted by the police department and city clerk; (2) Information received through the public hearing process; (3) Whether the applicant has or will take affirmative action to minimize public safety problems commonly associated with on-sale liquor establishments, including, but not limited to, driving while intoxicated (DWI) drivers, illegal sale to minors, disturbing the peace, etc.; (4) The license application and any other relevant information. Sec. 3-70. Ineligibility. (a) No license under this division shall be issued to or held by any person who: (3) Is not a citizen of the United States or a resident alien; (5) Is not of good moral character and repute; (7) Within five years of the license application, has been convicted of a felony or a willful violation of a federal or state law or local ordinance governing the manufacture, sale, distribution or possession for sale or distribution of an alcoholic beverage, and who cannot show competent evidence under M.S.A. § 364.03 of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of a licensee. Sec. 3-71. Conditions of approval. At the time a license under this division is issued or a consumption and display permit is approved, the city council may attach special conditions to the approval of such license or permit based upon State and City Liquor Regulations Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 80 the nature of the business, the location of the business and verified complaints, if any, to protect the health, safety, welfare and quietude of the city, and ensure harmony with the location where the business is located. Violation of any of the conditions shall be grounds for revocation of the license. From the League of MN Cities Handbook 8. Grounds for denying a license The following are common examples of reasons that may be sufficient grounds for denying a license. This list is not intended to be an exhaustive list of reasons. Before any of the following information is used to deny a license, the city will need to make a finding of fact of the condition that exists and be able to support that finding with evidence. When a city exercises discretion and acts in a quasi-judicial manner when dealing with a license application, the courts will not overturn a city’s denial of a license provided the city has a clear record supported by evidence justifying its actions. Failure to have a finding of fact supported by evidence makes it easier for an unsuccessful applicant to claim his or her due process rights were violated, and that the city acted arbitrarily and capriciously. • The applicant does not comply with the prerequisites and conditions in the ordinance. The prerequisites and conditions must be valid. • The applicant is not of “good moral character,” and the license is for a profession or occupation that affects the public health, safety, morals or general welfare. The ordinance does not need to define “good moral character,” or phrases like “professional misconduct.” However, the city cannot disqualify a person from a licensed occupation because of a prior conviction of a crime, unless the crime directly relates to the occupation for which the person is seeking the license. • Granting a license would be a menace to the safety, health, morals, and welfare of the public. • There has been a material misrepresentation in the application. State and City Liquor Regulations Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 81 !"#$% &$’% !" #$$%$$$(!!)!$!&!! !*$!(!+,+-./)!) !$ 0$$$!*1 $&$’’$ 23+-4 ’2&, 52.4 ’2& 26+-4 ’2&,52.4 23+-4 ’2&,52.4 () 7889:; * *+,-*.-. 8<=899;&>-?#!, 78@8<===&>-?#!, <8<<8<===&2?&28&)A)&3, B8:8<==B &>-, :8<:8<==7 ,! !$! :8<:8<==7 ?-$89 3, 8<=899; Minnesota Public Criminal History Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 82 !&AC-2 "# !,.& 0-.#80-2&#5-# &A&-#+?"#-.3#$%&A9;==9 %% ’+.#5-22 &&9;=:@: ’%, :9<&>-?#! () ?<DE?@=& $ !?F==E?F< * 78@8<=== ! "# ! &A&-#+?"#-.3#$%&A=====B<< %% ’+.#5-22 &&====9= ’%, :9<&>-?#! () ?<D $ !?F@==E?F@= + <8<<8<=== !.AC-2?’A-.3 "# !.A+.D-.# .A&-#+$%&A:====9<@: %% . -&# &&==<<@;= ’%3, ;<B &2?&28&)A)& () !?@:&E ?<DE?<& $ !?F<==E!?F=E?F< , B8:8<==B !&AC-2 "# !,.& 0-.#80-2&#5-# &A&-#+?"#-.3#$%&A=<====; %% ’+.#5-22 &&===9;B ’%, :9<=&>- () Minnesota Public Criminal History Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 83 ?<DE?@=& $?FB= :8<:8<==7 !#C-2 "# !# ’-.00- #&-#+$%&=;<9:7 %% #53 &&=;=<B: ’%! :=9@;;<,! !$ () $ #&-#+$%&=;<9:7 %% #53 &&=;=<B: ’%3, :=9;7<?-$89 () ?<DE?& $ !?FB== ,’!!$ $.!!$ !(!!!* $$=8<8<==9@%9%@ ,GH +"’"& #" # I,’!!$<==;)%@==GH% Minnesota Public Criminal History Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 84 Police Department Case Report Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 85 Police Department Case Report Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 86 Police Department Case Report Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 87 Police Department Case Report Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 88 Police Department Case Report Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 89 Police Department Case Report Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 90 Police Department Case Report Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 91 Police Department Case Report Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 92 1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2009 609.377 609.377 MALICIOUS PUNISHMENT OF CHILD. Subdivision 1.Malicious punishment.A parent, legal guardian, or caretaker who, by an intentional act or a series of intentional acts with respect to a child, evidences unreasonable force or cruel discipline that is excessive under the circumstances is guilty of malicious punishment of a child and may be sentenced as provided in subdivisions 2 to 6. Subd. 2.Gross misdemeanor.If the punishment results in less than substantial bodily harm, the person may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both. Subd. 3.Enhancement to a felony.Whoever violates the provisions of subdivision 2 during the time period between a previous conviction or adjudication for delinquency under this section or sections 609.221 to 609.2231, 609.224, 609.2242, 609.342 to 609.345, or 609.713, and the end of five years following discharge from sentence or disposition for that conviction or adjudication may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of $10,000, or both. Subd. 4.Felony; child under age four.If the punishment is to a child under the age of four and causes bodily harm to the head, eyes, neck, or otherwise causes multiple bruises to the body, the person may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of $10,000, or both. Subd. 5.Felony; substantial bodily harm.If the punishment results in substantial bodily harm, the person may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. Subd. 6.Felony; great bodily harm.If the punishment results in great bodily harm, the person may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both. History:1983 c 217 s 4; 1984 c 628 art 3 s 11; 1988 c 655 s 2; 1989 c 290 art 6 s 16; 1990 c 542 s 18; 1994 c 636 art 2 s 37; 2000 c 437 s 14 Copyright © 2009 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.MN Statutes 609.377 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 93 1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2009 609.78 609.78 EMERGENCY TELEPHONE CALLS AND COMMUNICATIONS. Subdivision 1.Misdemeanor offenses.Whoever does the following is guilty of a misdemeanor: (1) refuses to relinquish immediately a coin-operated telephone or a telephone line consisting of two or more stations when informed that the line is needed to make an emergency call; (2) secures a relinquishment of a coin-operated telephone or a telephone line consisting of two or more stations by falsely stating that the line is needed for an emergency; (3) publishes telephone directories to be used for telephones or telephone lines and the directories do not contain a copy of this section; (4) makes a call for emergency police, fire, medical, or ambulance service, knowing that no police, fire, or medical emergency exists; or (5) interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or otherwise interferes with the transmission of a citizen's band radio channel communication the purpose of which is to inform or inquire about a medical emergency or an emergency in which property is or is reasonably believed to be in imminent danger of damage or destruction. Subd. 2.Interference with an emergency call; gross misdemeanor offense.A person who intentionally interrupts, disrupts, impedes, or interferes with an emergency call or who intentionally prevents or hinders another from placing an emergency call, and whose conduct does not result in a violation of section 609.498, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or to payment of a fine of not more than $3,000, or both. Subd. 3.Definition.For purposes of this section, "emergency call" means: (1) a 911 call; (2) any call for emergency medical or ambulance service; or (3) any call for assistance from a police or fire department or for other assistance needed in an emergency to avoid serious harm to person or property, and an emergency exists. History:1963 c 753 art 1 s 609.78; 1971 c 23 s 79; 1983 c 140 s 1; 1984 c 630 s 1; 1997 c 239 art 3 s 19; 1999 c 24 s 1; 2008 c 270 s 1 Copyright © 2009 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved.MN Statutes 609.78 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 94 Excerpts – Official Minutes Planning Commission City of St. Louis Park Aug. 19, 2009 3. Hearings A. Conditional Use Permit for restaurant with liquor Location: 8100 State Highway 7 (Knollwood Mall) Applicant: El GordoUno, Inc. Case No.: 09-16-CUP Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The applicant, Baldomero Valenzo, spoke briefly about his desire to be able to serve liquor at the restaurant. Chair Kramer opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Robertson moved approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow a restaurant with intoxicating liquor license at 8100 State Highway 7 with conditions. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Mr. Morrison stated that the City Council will consider the CUP and the applicant’s request for a liquor license at the same meeting. Excerpts From Planning Commission Minutes 8-18-09 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 95 Agenda Item 8a Resolution for approval of Conditional Use Permit RESOLUTION NO. 09-___ RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-194(d)(4) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A RESTAURANT WITH INTOXICATING LIQUOR FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND LOCATED AT 8140 STATE HIGHWAY #7 BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Baldomero Valenzo made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-194(d)(4) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of operating a restaurant with intoxicating liquor within a C-2 General Commercial Zoning District located at 8140 State Highway #7 for the legal description as follows, to- wit: See Attached Legal Description – Exhibit A 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 09-16-CUP) and the effect of the proposed restaurant with intoxicating liquor on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Council has determined that the proposed restaurant with intoxicating liquor will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 09-16-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Conditional Use Permit to allow a restaurant with intoxicating liquor at the location of 8140 State Highway #7, which is a tenant space of the property described above, is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: Proposed Resolution approving CUP Agenda Item 8a Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 96 Resolution No. 09-_______ Page 2 1. The conditional use permit is exclusive to a restaurant located in the tenant space with the address of 8140 State Hwy 7. 2. The conditional use permit shall become null and void if the restaurant ceases to operate for more than three months. 3. A liquor license must be approved by the City prior to intoxicating liquor being sold. 4. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 5. Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. 6. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of a building permit. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Proposed Resolution approving CUP Agenda Item 8a Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6b)Page 97 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 6c(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: 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD#1 budget and property owner service charge? BACKGROUND: On November 6, 2006, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a multi-year service charge for Special Service District No. 1 (this district is located along Excelsior Blvd from Quentin Ave to Hwy 100 and along Park Center Blvd and Monterey Drive). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the proposed 2010 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on October 22 and October 29, 2009. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Special Service District No. 1 Financial Position: As of October 1, 2009 Special Service District No. 1 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately $$167,445. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters: The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. Proposed 2010 Budget and Service Charges: The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following: • 2010 budget amount of $126,592, same as 2009; and • 2010 service charge amount of $32,534, a decrease of $94,058 from 2009. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(1)) Page 2 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Facilities Maintenance Division incurs service charges within this district for the property located at 3700 Monterey Drive (Recreation Center/Wolfe Park). The proposed service charge for 2010 is $8,441. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: 2010 Proposed Budget Resolution w/ 2010 Service Charges Attachment A Prepared by: John Altepeter, Facilities Superintendent Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(1)) Page 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Special Service District No. 1 2010 Budget No. Item 2009 Revised Budget 2010 Proposed Budget 6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,200 1,200 6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 9,000 9,000 6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 0 6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL SERVICES 29 29 6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 4,500 4,500 6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 56,193 56,193 6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 5,660 5,660 6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 2,500 2,500 6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 5,000 5,000 6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 7,500 7,500 6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 28,500 28,500 6950 LEGAL NOTICES 110 110 7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 400 400 7207.880 SSD Infrastructure Repair 4,000 4,000 7301.890 SSD Pedestrian 2,000 2,000 7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 126,592 126,592 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(1)) Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 09-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING 2010 BUDGET AND PROPERTY OWNER SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 1 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2067-96, the City Council created Special Service District No. 1 (the “District”) . The specific properties located within the District are identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 06-167, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2010 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 06-167, the maximum budget to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 06-167, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 27, 2009. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2010 Budget for Special Service District No. 1 of $126,592 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 1 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2010 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 is $32,534 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(1)) Page 5 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 6c(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: 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 2 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD#2 budget and property owner service charge? BACKGROUND: On October 20, 2008, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a multi-year service charge for Special Service District No. 2 (this district is located along Excelsior Blvd. from Monterey Drive/38th St. to France Ave.). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the proposed 2010 budget. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on October 22 and October 29, 2009. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Special Service District No. 2 Financial Position: As of October 1, 2009 Special Service District No. 2 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately $ 7,851. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget and thus the 2010 Budget has been increased 5% to work towards increasing the reserve. Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters: The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. Proposed 2010 Budget and Service Charges: The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following: • 2010 budget amount of $44,660, an increase of $2,420 from 2009; and • 2010 service charge amount of $44,660, an increase of $2,420 from 2009. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(2)) Page 2 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Facilities Division budget incurs service charges for the City owned property, within this service district, for the bus shelter located at 3929 Excelsior Blvd. The proposed fee for 2010 is $60. In addition, with the purchase of the American Inn property, the EDA will be responsible for a service charge of $2,580 for this site. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: 2010 Proposed Budget Resolution w/2010 Service Charges Attachment A Prepared by: John Altepeter, Facilities Maintenance Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(2)) Page 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Special Service District No. 2 2010 Budget No. Item 2009 Revised Budget 2010 Proposed Budget 6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 200 212 6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 3,500 3,710 6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 0 6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL SERVICES 50 53 6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 2,000 2,000 6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 0 0 6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 2,800 2,968 6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 1,000 1,060 6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 2,800 2,968 6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 5,700 6,042 6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 18,200 19,292 6950 LEGAL NOTICES 110 110 7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 130 150 7207.880 SSD Infrastructure Repair 4,000 4,240 7301.890 SSD Pedestrian 1,750 1,855 7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 42,240 44,660 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(2)) Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 09-___ RESOLUTION APPROVING 2010 BUDGET AND PROPERTY OWNER SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT No. 2 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2093-97, the City Council created Special Service District No. 1 (the “District”) . The specific properties located within the District are identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 08-133, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2018 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 08-133, the maximum budget to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 08-133, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 27, 2009. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2010 Budget for Special Service District No. 2 of $44,660 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 2 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2010 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 is $44,660 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(2)) Page 5 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 6c(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: 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 3 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD#3 budget and property owner service charge? BACKGROUND: On April 15, 2002, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special Service District No. 3 (located along Excelsior Blvd. from Quentin Avenue to Monterey Drive/38th St.). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the proposed 2010 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on October 22 and October 29, 2009. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Special Service District No. 3 Financial Position: As of October 1, 2009 Special Service District No. 3 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately $ 41,062. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters: The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. Proposed 2010 Budget and Service Charges: The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following: • 2010 budget amount of $63,000, same as 2009; and • 2010 service charge amount of $63,000, an increase of $26,744 from 2009. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(3)) Page 2 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City incurs service charges for the property, within this district, located at 4760 Excelsior Blvd., which is undeveloped and owned by the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority. The proposed fee for 2010 is $1,373. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: 2010 Proposed Budget Resolution w/ 2010 Service Charges Attachment A Prepared by: John Altepeter, Facilities Superintendent Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(3)) Page 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Special Service District No. 3 2010 Budget No. Item 2009 Revised Budget 2010 Proposed Budget 6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 500 500 6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 4,300 4,300 6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 0 6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL SERVICES 50 50 6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 2,500 2,500 6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 34,500 34,500 6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 1,000 1,000 6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 1,000 1,000 6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 3,000 3,000 6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 2,400 2,400 6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 10,500 10,500 6950 LEGAL NOTICES 110 110 7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 200 200 7207.880 SSD Infrastructure Repair 1,000 1,000 7301.890 SSD Pedestrian 1,940 1,940 7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 63,000 63,000 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(3)) Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 09-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING 2009 BUDGET AND PROPERTY OWNER SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 3 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2224-02, the City Council created Special Service District No. 3 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 02-043, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2012 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 02-043, the maximum budget to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 02-043, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 27, 2009. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2010 Budget for Special Service District No. 3 of $63,000 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 3 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2010 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 is $63,000 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(3)) Page 5 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 6c(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: 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 4 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD#4 budget and property owner service charge? BACKGROUND: On July 18, 2005, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special Service District No. 4. (located along Excelsior Blvd west of Hwy 100). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the proposed 2010 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on October 22 and October 29, 2009. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Special Service District No. 4 Financial Position: As of October 1, 2009 Special Service District No. 4 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately $ 63,640. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. With anticipation of formal acceptance by the City of the streetscape project 2009, a service charge was assessed to maintain an operating reserve for expected expenditures 2009. The project was not formally accepted by the City until late 2009. Therefore, expenditures were not charged to the district, giving the district a large enough balance to more than cover expenditures for 2010. As such he property owners will not be assessed a service charge in 2010. Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters: The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(4)) Page 2 Proposed 2010 Budget and Service Charges: The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following: • 2010 budget amount of $38,100, same as 2009; and • 2010 service charge amount of $0, a decrease of $18,000 from 2009. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City incurs service charges for the City Municipal Parking Lot within this district, located on Excelsior Blvd. The proposed fee for 2010 is $0. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: 2010 Proposed Budget Resolution w/2010 Service Charges Attachment A Prepared by: John Altepeter, Facilities Maintenance Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(4)) Page 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Special Service District No. 4 2010 Budget No. Item 2009 Revised Budget 2010 Proposed Budget 6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,000 1,000 6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 2,700 2,700 6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 0 6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL SERVICES 50 50 6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 2,500 2,500 6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 0 0 6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 2,000 2,000 6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 1,500 1,500 6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 5,000 5,000 6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 3,500 3,500 6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 16,000 16,000 6950 LEGAL NOTICES 50 50 7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 200 200 7207.880 SSD Infrastructure Repair 1,500 1,500 7301.890 SSD Pedestrian 1,750 1,750 7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 350 350 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 38,100 38,100 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(4)) Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 09-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING 2010 BUDGET AND PROPERTY OWNER SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 4 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2298.05, the City Council created Special Service District No. 4 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 05-100, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2012 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 05-100, the maximum budget to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 05-100, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 27, 2009. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2010 Budget for Special Service District No. 4 of $38,100 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 4 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2010 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 4 is $0 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(4)) Page 5 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 6c(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: 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 5 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #5 budget and property owner service charge? BACKGROUND: On February 2, 2009, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special Service District No. 5 (located along Park Place Boulevard between I-394 and Cedar Lake Rd). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the proposed 2010 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on October 22 and October 29, 2009. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Special Service District No. 5 Financial Position: As of October 1, 2009 Special Service District No. 5 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately $ 13,205. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters: The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. Proposed 2010 Budget and Service Charges: The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following: • 2010 budget amount of $26,400; and • 2010 service charge amount of $26,400. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(5)) Page 2 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: 2010 Proposed Budget Resolution w/2010 Service Charges Attachment A Prepared by: John Altepeter, Facilities Superintendent Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(5)) Page 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Special Service District No. 5 2010 Budget No. Item 2009 Revised Budget 2010 Proposed Budget 6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 0 0 6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 0 0 6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 0 6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL SERVICES 0 50 6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 0 3,250 6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 0 0 6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 0 1,300 6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 0 1,000 6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 0 5,000 6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 0 3,000 6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 0 11,000 6950 LEGAL NOTICES 0 200 7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 0 300 7207.880 SSD Infrastructure Repair 0 1,300 7301.890 SSD Pedestrian 0 0 7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 0 26,400 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(5)) Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 09-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING 2010 BUDGET AND PROPERTY OWNER SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 5 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2371-09, the City Council created Special Service District No. 3 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolutions No. 09-021, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2019 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 09-021, the maximum budget to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 09-021, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 27, 2009. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2010 Budget for Special Service District No. 5 of $26,400 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 5 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2010 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 5 is $26,400 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(5)) Page 5 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 6c(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: 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving 2010 Budget and Property Owner Service Charges for Special Service District No. 6 and directing staff to certify the annual service charges to Hennepin County. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve SSD #6 budget and property owner service charge? BACKGROUND: On June 15, 2009, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special Service District No. 6 (located along 36th Street W. from Wooddale Avenue to Highway 100). Annually, the City Council must set a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board approved the proposed 2010 budget and service charges. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on October 22 and October 29, 2009. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Special Service District No. 6 Financial Position: As of October 1, 2009 Special Service District No. 5 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of approximately $ 12,225. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. Maximum Budget / Service Charge Restriction Parameters: The budget and service charge/ special assessment do not have to be the same dollar amount since excess operating reserves may be used in some years. By ordinance, the maximum budget increase cannot exceed the previous year’s authorized budget amount by more than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase, up to a maximum of 5%. This adjustment is based upon the applicable CPI percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. Proposed 2010 Budget and Service Charges: The Advisory Board recommended approval of the following: • 2010 budget amount of $24,450; and • 2010 service charge amount of $12,225. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(6)) Page 2 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City incurs service charges within this district for properties located at 3575 Wooddale Avenue, 5814 36th St W. and 5816 36th St W. The proposed total service charges for 2010 are $1,119. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: 2010 Proposed Budget Resolution w/2010 Service Charges Attachment A Prepared by: John Altepeter, Facilities Superintendent Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(6)) Page 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Special Service District No. 6 2010 Budget No. Item 2009 Revised Budget 2010 Proposed Budget 6212 GENERAL SUPPLIES 0 400 6224 LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 0 2,000 6223.650 BANNER REPLACEMENT 0 0 6410 GENERAL PROFFESSIONAL SERVICES 00 6410.678 SSD Mgmt Services 0 2,500 6630.772 SSD – Snow Removal 0 0 6630.773 SSD - Site Maintenance 0 1,000 6630.774 SSD – Banner Install/Removal 0 1,000 6630.775 SSD – Irrigation Service 0 3,500 6630.776 SSD – Decorative Install 0 3,500 6630.777 SSD – Landscape Service 0 9,000 6950 LEGAL NOTICES 0 150 7106 PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 0 400 7207.880 SSD Infrastructure Repair 0 1,000 7301.890 SSD Pedestrian 0 0 7302 GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 0 0 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 0 24,450 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(6)) Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 09-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING 2010 BUDGET AND PROPERTY OWNER SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 6 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2374-09, the City Council created Special Service District No. 6 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on Attachment “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 09-078, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2019 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 09-078, the maximum budget to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 09-045, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 27, 2009. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2010 Budget for Special Service District No. 6 of $24,450 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 6 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2010 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 6 is $12,225 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Attachment “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 6c(6)) Page 5 Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 8a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: El Gordo’s Restaurant – Conditional Use Permit to operate a restaurant with intoxicating liquor. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt Resolution Granting Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-194(d)(4) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Relating to Zoning to Permit a Restaurant with Intoxicating Liquor for Property Zoned C-2 General Commercial and Located at 8140 State Highway #7. POLICY CONSIDERATION: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required for restaurants to serve intoxicating liquor. The City Council must make a finding(s) that the applicant meets the conditions required for a CUP to be approved. BACKGROUND: Zoning: General Commercial (C-2) Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Applicant: Baldomero Valenzo Description of Request: The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow an existing restaurant located in the Knollwood Mall to serve intoxicating liquor. A liquor license is also required, and an application for the license was applied for and is currently under review by the City. Existing Restaurant The restaurant is currently operating in the strip mall section of Knollwood mall. The restaurant has operated in this location for several years without serving intoxicating liquor. The applicant is in the process of updating the menu, and he would like to serve margaritas, beer and other drinks. An application was made in 2008; however, the applicant withdrew that application prior to Council consideration. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 2 Analysis: Zoning Conditions of Approval: Restaurants with intoxicating liquor are a permitted land use in the C-2 district by CUP. For a CUP to be approved, several general conditions must be met that a re designed to ensure the proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and will not create undue impacts on the community and adjacent properties. In addition to the standard CUP requirements, Section 36-194(d)(4) of the zoning ordinance requires the following specific conditions for this use. Access: Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. The property can be accessed without impacting residential properties. It has direct access to State Highway #7, Texas Avenue and Aquila Avenue. Location: Buildings shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential or has an occupied institutional building including but not limited to a school, religious institution or community center. The restaurant is located more than 600 feet from any of the listed uses and residentially zoned property. Pedestrian Ways: Separate pedestrian ways shall be constructed to allow for the separation of pedestrian and vehicular movements within the parking lot. The restaurant is located at Knollwood Mall, which has adequate pedestrian sidewalks interconnecting the other uses located in the mall, and adequate connections to sidewalks along Aquila Avenue and Texas Avenue. Comprehensive Plan: The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of the redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood in which it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying this requirement. The proposed use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan. Parking: The restaurant is located in Knollwood Mall, which operates under a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The parking and traffic at the mall has been studied, and approved under the PUD based SITE Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 3 on the types of uses existing at the mall today. The number of parking spaces required by the zoning ordinance does not increase when intoxicating liquor is added to the menu. Liquor License: In addition to the CUP, a liquor license is required from the city before the applicant can sell intoxicating liquor. An application was made, and is currently under review by the City Council. Even if the CUP is approved, the applicant would not be able to sell liquor until a liquor license is issued. 120 Day Review Period: State law requires municipalities to act on zoning applications within 120 days of receipt of the complete application. In this case, the CUP application is required to be acted upon prior to the 120 days expiring. The liquor license application, however, is not a zoning application, and therefore, the 120 day law does not apply to it. The 120 days expires on November 12, 2009, and the November 2nd meeting is the last opportunity the Council will have to act on the CUP prior to the 120 days expiring. Since both a liquor license and a CUP are needed for El Gordo to serve intoxicating liquor, the CUP should be conditioned on an Intoxicating Liquor License being granted. This approach was recommended by the City Attorney. Planning Commission: A CUP requires a public hearing before the Planning Commission. A public hearing was conducted on August 19, 2009. No comments were received from the public. The Commission recommended approval (6-0) with staff recommendations. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable Attachments: Draft Resolution Location map Site Photographs Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 09-___ RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-194(d)(4) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A RESTAURANT WITH INTOXICATING LIQUOR FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND LOCATED AT 8140 STATE HIGHWAY #7 BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Baldomero Valenzo made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-194(d)(4) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of operating a restaurant with intoxicating liquor within a C-2 General Commercial Zoning District located at 8140 State Highway #7 for the legal description as follows, to-wit: See Attached Legal Description – Exhibit A 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 09-16-CUP) and the effect of the proposed restaurant with intoxicating liquor on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Council has determined that the proposed restaurant with intoxicating liquor will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 09-16-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Conditional Use Permit to allow a restaurant with intoxicating liquor at the location of 8140 State Highway #7, which is a tenant space of the property described above, is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. The conditional use permit is exclusive to a restaurant located in the tenant space with the address of 8140 State Hwy 7. 2. The conditional use permit shall become null and void if the restaurant ceases to operate for more than three months. 3. A liquor license must be approved by the City prior to intoxicating liquor being sold. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 5 4. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 5. Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. 6. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of a building permit. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 6 EXHIBIT A PARCEL 1: That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, which lies North of State Trunk Highway No. 7 and East of the following described line: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter: thence South along the West line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 87.45 feet; thence deflecting to the left 71 degrees 01 minutes 30 seconds and running Southeasterly 325.2 feet; thence deflecting to the right 50 degrees 47 minutes 30 seconds and running Southeasterly 262.1 feet; thence deflecting to the left 27 degrees 12 minutes and running Southeasterly 954.12 feet, more or less, to a point on the Northerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; excepting therefrom the following 5 parcels: 1. That part of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter described as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence running West along the North line of the said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 783 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 499.55 feet; thence East parallel with the North line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 783 feet, more or less, to a point in the East line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence North along said East line 499.55 feet more or less to the point of beginning. 2. The right-of-way of Texas Avenue; 3. That part of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter described as follows: Beginning at the Northwest corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence running East along the North line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 316.82 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of the East seven- eighths of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter, said Northwest corner being the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence running South at right angles 192.92 feet; thence deflecting to the left 21 degrees 57 minutes and running Southeasterly 252.36 feet; thence deflecting to the left 27 degrees 12 minutes and running Southeasterly 954.12 feet, more or less, to a point in the Northerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; thence deflecting to the left 52 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds and running Northeasterly along said right-of-way line 37.6 feet; thence deflecting to the left 127 degrees 04 minutes 30 minutes and running Northwesterly 967.5 feet; thence deflecting to the right 27 degrees 12 minutes and running Northwesterly 239.28 feet; thence deflecting to the right 21 degrees 57 minutes and running Northerly 187.1 feet, more or less to a point in the North line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter, which point is 30 feet East of the actual point of beginning as measured along said North line; thence running West along said North line to the actual point of beginning; 4. That part of South Half of the Southeast Quarter described as follows: Commencing at the Northwest corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence South 87.45 feet; thence deflecting to the left 71 degrees 00 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 325.2 feet; thence North parallel to the West line of said Southeast Quarter to the North line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence West along the North line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter to the point of beginning less the following: Commencing at a point 30 feet Southerly along the quarter line from the Northwest corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which will be called the point of beginning: thence 20 feet Southerly along the quarter line; thence 120.00 feet Easterly along a line paralleling the North line of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter to a point of curvature of a 31 degrees 53 minutes 24 seconds curve to the right to its intersection with the Western right-of-way line of Aquila Avenue; thence Northerly along the right-of-way line to a point 30 feet Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 7 South of the North line of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, thence Westerly along the Southerly right-of-way line of West 36th Street to the point of beginning. 5. That part of the said South Half of the Southeast Quarter described as follows: Commencing at the Northeasterly corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence Westerly along the Northerly line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter a distance of 783.00 feet; thence Southerly, parallel with the Easterly line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 499.55 feet; thence Easterly, parallel with said Northerly line, a distance of 736.99 feet to the intersection with a line 46.00 feet Westerly of, as measured at right angles to and parallel with said Easterly line, and the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing Easterly along the last described course a distance of 13.00 feet to the intersection with a line 33.00 feet Westerly of as measured at right angles to and parallel with said Easterly line; thence Southerly parallel with said Easterly line a distance of 155.00 feet to the Northerly right of way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; thence Southwesterly along said Northwesterly right-of-way line a distance of 20.40 feet to the intersection with a line 46.00 feet Westerly of, as measured at right angles to and parallel with said Easterly line; thence Northerly, parallel with said Easterly line, a distance of 171.01 feet to the point of beginning; according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota. PARCEL 2: That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as follows: Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the West line of Texas Avenue in the Village of St. Louis Park, MN and the North line of said South Half of said Southeast Quarter ; thence South along the West line of said Texas Avenue a distance of 499.55 feet; thence West and parallel with said North line of said South Half of said Southeast Quarter a distance of 750 feet; thence North to a point on the North line of said Texas Avenue; thence East along the North line of said South Half of said Southeast Quarter a distance of 750 feet to the point of beginning, except the North 30 feet thereof, also save and except the West 13.00 feet of the East 46.00 feet of the North 499.55 feet of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the 5th P.M., except the North 30.00 feet thereof. According to the United States Government Survey thereof and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract PARCEL 3: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1; Knollwood Mall 1st Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Torrens Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 8 Location Map Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 9 Site Photographs Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item 8a) Page 10 Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes Excerpts Planning Commission Minutes Aug. 19, 2009 3. Hearings A. Conditional Use Permit for restaurant with liquor Location: 8100 State Highway 7 (Knollwood Mall) Applicant: El GordoUno, Inc. Case No.: 09-16-CUP Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The applicant, Baldomero Valenzo, spoke briefly about his desire to be able to serve liquor at the restaurant. Chair Kramer opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Robertson moved approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow a restaurant with intoxicating liquor license at 8100 State Highway 7 with conditions. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Mr. Morrison stated that the City Council will consider the CUP and the applicant’s request for a liquor license at the same meeting. Meeting Date: November 2, 2009 Agenda Item #: 8b Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: CSM / BPG Properties – Hotel Proposal, 600 Hwy 169. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Giving Approval for Preliminary Plat of MetroPoint with Variances from Subdivision Ordinance for Sidewalk Easement. Motion to Adopt Resolution Approving a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to Zoning for Property Zoned O- Office located at 600 Highway 169. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to approve the preliminary plat and preliminary PUD based on the merits of the proposal and its relationship to the City’s code and Comprehensive Plan? BACKGROUND: Requested is preliminary approval of a subdivision plat and Planned Unit Development (PUD). The plat and PUD would accommodate the construction of a new 162-room, 7-story hotel within the Metropoint office complex, located immediately east of the adjacent 600 tower. The hotel will include a first floor lobby with a restaurant that will primarily serve hotel guests, and several conference rooms to accommodate business meetings and other small events. The proposal is located in the Shelard Park neighborhood. Also included in the 15-acre PUD are three existing office buildings of varying heights that together include approximately 700,000 square feet of office space, as well as the parking structures associated with the office buildings. The tallest office building, the 600 Tower, is 18 stories in height. There are no changes to the office buildings or the parking structures included as part of the PUD. Shelard Park was developed in the early 1970s as part of a large Special Permit encompassing the entire neighborhood. At that time, the area was platted to include space for office, residential, retail and other commercial spaces. The “Metropoint” office complex at the corner of I-394 and Highway 169, currently owned by BPG Properties, originally included a space for a restaurant and movie theater, in addition to the office space discussed above. As the market for retail and entertainment has changed, the movie theater and restaurant were removed, leaving space for redevelopment on the site. The availability of excess parking in the site’s ramps makes redevelopment possible without a need for large amounts of new surface parking. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 2 The Planning Commission reviewed the CSM hotel proposal at a July study session, where changes were recommended that the developer has incorporated into the hotel’s design and site plan. At the Public Hearing held on October 7th, several citizens had questions about future development on the Santorini site located immediately to the south. No questions or concerns were raised that related directly to the CSM hotel proposal. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat and PUD. In addition to the typical exhibits, a project narrative provided by CSM Properties is also attached. Site Design: The site is located immediately northwest of the intersection of I-394 and Highway 169. The proposed design for the hotel reflects the overall design of the surrounding buildings, with stucco, glass, and a minimal amount of brick. A ground-level restaurant will have an open floor plan and an outside dining option during the summer months. A large outdoor area is proposed to the east of the hotel, surrounding the stormwater pond. There, hotel guests and office employees will have access to a walking path, seating, and other passive recreational amenities. Access to the site is provided via Highway 169 to Ford Road; cars are able to enter the hotel via a drop-off circle shared with the 600 tower, and then proceed back onto Ford Road to enter the parking structure located immediately adjacent. For transit users, Metro Transit route 675 passes by the site at approximately 30 minute intervals, with less frequent service during the evening hours. Special Permit: As mentioned above, the entire Shelard Park area is currently incorporated into a single Special Permit. In a general sense, this single Special Permit provides specific use and dimensional requirements for every property included within Shelard Park. To allow for future changes to this site and more appropriately address the needs of the office development owned by BPG Properties, a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) is proposed for the Metropoint Office Complex site only. The current application would allow for preliminary approval of the PUD. Prior to final approval by the City Council, BPG properties will submit a letter requesting the termination of the Special Permit. The City Council would then grant approval of the final PUD and termination of the Special Permit at the same time. Conditions of the original Special Permit that remain in effect have been included in the proposed resolution for the Preliminary PUD. Special Permit Area PUD Area Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 3 Zoning Review: The unique nature of the existing office development lends itself to the use of the Planned Unit Development section of the Zoning Ordinance. Had it been available at the time Shelard Park is developed, it is possible that the property would already be part of a PUD. Most applicably, the site has been developed with substantial setback modifications permitted originally through the Special Permit. For this reason, the PUD modification for setbacks is used extensively; many of the buildings and parking structures already in existence are located in close proximity to the property line, and some are directly adjacent to the property line. The Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is “Office,” and the site is correspondingly zoned “O – Office.” Hotels are permitted with conditions in the Office Zoning District. A PUD is requested to meet dimensional standards and to allow for modifications to the DORA requirements. Specific analysis of site details for the Office Zoning District is follows: Factor Required Proposed Met? Height No maximum height 7 stories; 88 feet Yes Building Materials Minimum 60% Class I materials 70% stucco, glass, brick Yes Setbacks – Front / Rear 20’ or bldg. height 15’ or ½ bldg height Setbacks – Side / Side 15’ + half bldg height 15’ + 1 foot for each foot bldg height above 40’ Vary greatly; PUD proposed Yes Off-Street Parking 2,495 spaces 2,898 spaces 51 surface spaces – hotel Yes Bicycle Parking 250 spaces 0 Yes Floor Area Ratio No maximum FAR 1.66 Yes Open Area / DORA 49,539 SF (6%) 67,221 SF (8.1%) Yes Landscaping Hotel – 93 trees, 558 shrubs Alternatives requested - discussion below Yes Mechanical Equipment Full screening Provided – rooftop & internal Yes Refuse Handling Full screening required Internal trash rooms provided Yes Stormwater Required city and watershed standards Above ground pond Yes Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 4 Architectural Materials The applicant is proposing that the new hotel echo the existing architecture on the site, while also reflecting other development in the area. For this reason, a substantial amount of stucco and glass are proposed. Stucco and glass, each Class I materials, are the primary materials used on the office buildings located around the hotel. In addition to these materials, brick is used to enhance the level of finish at the pedestrian level. The proposed hotel will exceed the architectural materials standards of the Zoning Ordinance. Parking Ample off-street parking is available on the site. Based on the parking requirements for office buildings and hotel, a total of 2,495 parking spaces are required. There are a total of 2,898 parking spaces currently available on the site; for this reason, no additional parking would be required for the hotel. However, the hotel determined that a 51-space parking lot would be beneficial for guests. Hotel staff and guests will use the ramp and spaces adjacent to the hotel will be signed for exclusive hotel use within the ramp. The bicycle parking requirement for the site is 250 spaces. Because the area is predominately auto- oriented, this level of bicycle parking would not be appropriate at this time. Proof of bicycle parking will be provided as an alternative. The areas for bicycle proof-of-parking could be converted into bicycle parking without any impact on required off-street vehicle parking or landscaping. The hotel will provide 16 bicycle parking spaces. It is expected that some hotel staff will use the bicycle parking; at this time, it is not expected that hotel guests will arrive by bike. DORA There is 67,221 square feet, or 8% of the total finished square footage of the site, provided for outside access and recreation to meet the requirements for Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA) within the PUD. Because of the park dedication provided when the site was originally developed, the DORA requirement is reduced from 12% to 6% through the use of a PUD. Shelard Park, dedicated as part of the original development, is an 8.5 acre park accessible directly from the PUD site. The DORA is provided through a mix of outdoor seating along the sidewalk/trail area, as well as through several outdoor patios located near the office buildings within the development. The hotel development will include a large outdoor plaza area to the east of the building, surrounding the stormwater pond. Although the stormwater pond does not count towards the DORA calculation, it will serve as an amenity to office employees and hotel guests using the outdoor plaza area. Landscaping The applicant has attempted to maximize the amount of landscaping available on the hotel site. The landscape plan represents an attempt to meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance while tailoring the standards for a high density urban site. The plan includes the installation of 53 new trees and 247 new shrubs, all incorporated into the accessible DORA areas. In addition to the required trees and shrubs, the landscape plan includes over 1,000 new perennials located around the site. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 5 As the landscape plan does not meet the standard planting requirement of the Zoning Ordinance, alternative landscape options are provided. The Zoning Ordinance states that landscape requirements may be modified if the proposal “is of exceptional design [including] public art, public seating, an outdoor plaza, green rooftop, recreational benefit, or transit shelter…” and “will allow a site plan that is more consistent with the character of the area.” Alternatives included in the plan include integrated pedestrian facilities between buildings, parking areas, and Shelard Park, use of native grasses and other perennials throughout the site plan, a stormwater plan design with an urban edge adjacent to an outdoor plaza to improve the level of site amenity, and an improved pedestrian access across the site representing a mixed-traffic approach that will increase the level of activity on the site in a dynamic way. Staff supports the alternatives proposed by the applicant. Landscape improvements were completed on the remainder of the site in early 2008. Due to the high-density, urban nature of the site, the improvements closely reflect the intent of the alternative provisions allowed for landscaping under the Zoning Ordinance. A letter from the applicant to City Staff, attached, discusses the specific improvements completed in 2008. Tree Replacement Tree replacement for the hotel site takes into account all existing significant trees on the entire PUD site. The redevelopment will require 20 existing trees on the hotel site to be removed, accounting for a total of 321 caliper inches. On the remainder of the site, there are 139 trees accounting for a total of 1,740 caliper inches. The tree replacement formula in the Zoning Ordinance requires additional tree plantings only when over 20% of the significant trees on a site are removed. In this case, the removal of 321 caliper inches is only 18% of the total significant trees on the site. The applicant is proposing the installation of 136 caliper inches of trees on the site, exceeding the tree replacement requirement. Stormwater Management The proposed stormwater pond will provide water storage and quality improvement measures for the hotel site. The pond will have an urban character to allow for walking paths around it, which will improve the outside environment for guests and office workers using the surrounding DORA areas. Public Works Staff reviewed the stormwater calculations and construction details and determined that the pond meets the requirements of the City and complies with the requirements of the new Surface Water Management Plan. The stormwater plans have also undergone a preliminary review by representatives from the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Organization. The BCWMO must issue permits for the site prior to construction. Engineering Comments The City Engineer reviewed the proposed plans and determined that the site has adequate access to public and private utilities and roadways. Traffic concerns related to this development were minimal because the hotel will have a substantially different peak travel time than the surrounding office development. It was noted that permits for erosion control and right-of-way access will be required prior to construction. Additionally, permits from the Bassett Creek Watershed District will also be required. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 6 Preliminary Plat: The applicant is proposing toe split one of two existing lots into three lots. Altogether the plat proposes four lots in place of two existing lots. The proposed plat covers a sub-area of the PUD. Because the property was previously platted there is no need for additional right-of-way. Engineering has no issues with the current proposal. The two existing lots each currently have an office building and a parking ramp. Each lot is in conformance with the standards of the O – Office Zoning District. The new lots meet the minimum standards, including the minimum lot width of 100 feet and the minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet. Lot 1 Lot 1 is 28,814 square feet located adjacent to Ford Road. This lot is the location of the former movie theater; there is no development currently proposed for this location. However, the property owner is proposing a lot in this location to improve the possibilities for future development. It is anticipated that the lot could be used for a small retail or office use. A PUD amendment would be required for any future development on this lot. Lot 2 Lot 2 is 189,709 square feet and includes the existing 18-story 600 Tower building and associated ramp. Much of the parking turnaround from Ford Road is also on this lot; private easements will be conveyed across the parking area to permit access by the hotel and users of the ramp at the 400 Building. Lot 3 Lot 3 is 71,417 square feet and has frontage along the Highway 169 frontage road. This lot would be used for the proposed Marriott hotel development, discussed above as part of the Preliminary PUD. Lot 4 Lot 4 is 205,979 square feet and includes the existing 8-story 400 Building and associated ramp. This building was included in the plat because of the need to adjust the lot line between the 400 Building and the proposed hotel. All zoning and plat requirements are still met even with the adjustment. Sidewalk The area to be platted includes sidewalk along all of Ford Road. The applicant has agreed to construct a new sidewalk along the Highway 169 frontage road, to stretch from the hotel property down to the south end of the property. A variance from the sidewalk requirement has been requested along the east and north sides of Lot 4, which includes the 400 Building. The variance in this location is requested because of technical difficulties in constructing a sidewalk, including topography on the north side of the site, utility conflicts, and tree location. Utility and stairway/retaining wall conflicts are pictured to the right. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 7 Staff finds that there are special conditions affecting the property impacting the owner’s ability to construct a sidewalk; that the granting of a variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare; that the variance corrects inequities resulting from existing site conditions, including topography; and that the variance is not contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, including the intent and design found in the Sidewalk and Trails plan. For these reasons, Staff finds that the applicant meets the standards for granting a subdivision variance along the east and north sides of Lot 4. For practical purposes, a sidewalk to the north of the hotel does not connect to anything; the frontage road in this location proceeds north, where it reaches a dead-end when the right-of-way terminates at an on-ramp for Highway 169. The sidewalk that is proposed, running along the frontage road in front of the hotel and to the south and west, would be connected to the rest of the Shelard Park neighborhood upon the redevelopment of the Santorini site. The proposed sidewalk could be easily reached by office employees at the 400 Building and the 600 Tower, as well as by hotel patrons. Until redevelopment happens at the Santorini site the proposed sidewalk will be isolated and will remain unconnected. At that time, it will be possible for individuals in the area to use the sidewalk to further loop through the Shelard Park neighborhood. Easement Variance A variance from the easement requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance is requested. The Ordinance requires a 10’ drainage and utility easement along all exterior property lines and a 5’ drainage and utility easement on both sides of any shared property line. As shown on sheet C-2, easements are provided along nearly all interior and exterior property lines. Due to the location of the existing parking ramp on Lot 2, it was not possible to create an easement of the full width; a 5’ easement, instead, is proposed along the south property line of Lot 1. The location of the porte-cochere, to the west of the proposed hotel on Lot 3, also creates a challenge for a full 10’ drainage and utility easement; for that reason, a 5’ easement is proposed in this location. The applicant meets the standards for granting subdivision variances for the easements. Special and unique circumstances apply; the buildings and parking structures are existing and were previously approved. Public Works and Engineering have reviewed the proposed plat and have determined that there is no need for the easements. Under the previous plat, similar easements were not required. The granting of the variances will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare of the community and are not contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The easements as proposed also substantially exceed what is necessary to provide the site with public and private utility service. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 8 Park and Trail Dedication It is typical of most platted property that park and trail dedication be completed at the time of the plat. In this case, the park and trail dedication was committed at the time of the original plat (aptly entitled “Shelard Park”). The dedication in that case resulted in the construction of what is now known as Shelard Park, an 8.5 acre park located immediately west of the applicant’s property (and currently an important part of the City’s park system). Because park and trail dedication was completed under the earlier plat, no park and trail dedication is required at this time. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: The construction of a new stormwater pond on the CSM hotel site improves the level of stewardship for the water resources of Shelard Park, meeting the environmental goals of the Vision. The new hotel will also improve the mixed-use character of the Shelard Park neighborhood, making it easier for visitors to participate in business, recreation and community in St. Louis Park, in part meeting the Vision goals for community. Attachments: Resolution approving the Preliminary Plat with Subdivision Variances Resolution approving the Preliminary Planned Unit Development Minutes Excerpt: Planning Commission meeting of October 7, 2009 Location Map Letter from Applicant: DORA and Landscaping Site Plan and related documents Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Planner Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 9 RESOLUTION NO. 09-___ RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF METROPOINT WITH VARIANCES FROM SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE FOR SIDEWALK AND EASEMENT BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Interchange Investors, LLC, owner and subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as METROPOINT has submitted an application for approval of preliminary plat of said subdivision with variances from the subdivision ordinance for sidewalk (Section 26-153) and easement (Section 26-154) in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder. 2. The proposed preliminary plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park. 3. The proposed plat is situated upon the following described lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit: Parcel 1: Lot 2, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, and that part of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, lying Easterly of a line drawn from a point on the North line of said lot distant 64.51 feet Westerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot to a point on the South line of said Lot distant 68.97 feet Westerly of the Southeast corner of said Lot, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Parcel 2: Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, except that part of Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK shown as Parcel 45 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 27-23 recorded as Document No. 5062849, also described as that part of said Lot 3 lying easterly of a straight line from Corner B9 to Corner B25 on said Plat 27-23, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract property) 4. There are special circumstances affecting the property such that the strict application of the provisions of the subdivision ordinance would deprive the applicant/owner of the reasonable use of the land. Such circumstances arise due to topography, utility location, tree location, and the location of existing buildings. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 10 5. The granting of the variances will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which the property is situated. 7. The variances are not contrary to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan does not call for the construction of sidewalks in this location, nor does it suggest that easements are now or will ever be necessary in all the locations required by the Subdivision Ordinance. The Comprehensive Plan calls for property such as this to be redeveloped, which could not occur without the variances. Conclusion 1. The proposed preliminary plat of Metropoint is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: a. Variances are approved from the subdivision ordinance requirement for a sidewalk along the north and east sides of Lot 4, Block 1 of Metropoint, and for an easement along the north side of Lot 2, Block 1 of Metropoint, and for an easement along the west side of Lot 3, Block 1 of Metropoint, as required by City Code, Section 26-153 and Section 26- 154. b. Park and Trail Dedication was already committed by the property underlying the Preliminary Plat of Metropoint for the construction of Shelard Park; for that reason, no additional Park and Trail Dedication fees are required. c. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-site. d. Developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council , 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 11 RESOLUTION NO.09-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED O-OFFICE LOCATED AT 600 HIGHWAY 169 WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received on August 18, 2009 from the applicant, and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was mailed to all owners of property within 350 feet of the subject property plus other affected property owners in the vicinity, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary PUD concept at the meeting of October 7, 2009, and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on September 24, 2009, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the meeting of October 7, 2009, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary PUD on a 7-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments in the record of decision. BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Interchange Investors, LLC and GSH Lodging, LLC have made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the O-Office district located at 600 Highway 169 for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Parcel 1: Lot 2, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, and that part of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, lying Easterly of a line drawn from a point on the North line of said lot distant 64.51 feet Westerly of the Northeast corner of said Lot to a point on the South line of said Lot distant 68.97 feet Westerly of the Southeast corner of said Lot, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 12 Parcel 2: Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK, except that part of Lot 3, Block 7, SHELARD PARK shown as Parcel 45 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 27-23 recorded as Document No. 5062849, also described as that part of said Lot 3 lying easterly of a straight line from Corner B9 to Corner B25 on said Plat 27-23, according to the plat of SHELARD PARK recorded as Document No. 3798450 in the office of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota (Abstract property) 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 09-19-PUD) and the effect of the proposed PUD on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that the PUD will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also determined that the proposed PUD is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 36-367(b)(5). The specific modifications include: a. Setback and yard requirements for the hotel portion of the PUD shall be reduced to 0. All other setbacks within the PUD shall be maintained in existing condition per the official exhibits. b. Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA) requirements shall be reduced from 12% to 6% to account for park dedication completed through the plat of SHELARD PARK, Hennepin County, Minnesota. c. Landscape alternatives per Section 36-364-(g) are approved in accordance with the official exhibits. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 09-19-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Preliminary Planned Unit Development at the location described is approved based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to starting any site work, the following conditions shall be met: a. The Final Planned Unit Development shall be approved by the City Council. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 13 b. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction and City representatives. c. All necessary permits must be obtained. d. Specifications for tree protection and erosion control fencing must be submitted and approved by the City Forester. Required tree protection and erosion control fencing must be installed prior to grading activities. 2. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the following conditions shall be met: a. Plans shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and Zoning Administrator to ensure that all proposed utilities, public access points and construction documents conform to the requirements of the City Code of Ordinances and City policies. b. To ensure construction of the landscaping, other required public improvements, and the cleaning of public streets during construction, a financial guarantee shall be provided in the amount of 125% of the cost of the landscaping materials. c. The planned installation of any mechanical equipment shall include means to ensure it is fully screened from off-site view. 3. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction: a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. b. Loud equipment shall be kept as far as possible from residences at all times. c. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighborhood properties. d. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. e. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. f. The City shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a public street. Work in a public street shall take place only upon the determination by the Director of Public Works that appropriate safety measures have been taken to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety. g. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in order to mitigate the impact of construction on surrounding properties. 4. Prior to the issuance of any temporary or permanent occupancy permit the following shall be completed: a. Fire lanes shall be signed and striped in accordance with the signed Official Exhibits. b. Landscaping and irrigation shall be in accordance with the signed Official Exhibits. c. Exterior building improvements shall be completed in accordance with the signed Official Exhibits and approved materials and colors. d. All roof top mechanical equipment shall be installed and it shall be demonstrated that all such equipment is fully screened from off-site views. To protect the health, safety and welfare of the community, the painting of mechanical equipment shall not be considered screening. 5. No outside storage is permitted. Incidental outside storage shall be removed within 48 hours. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 14 6. Sidewalks shall be maintained at all times in good repair to allow for adequate pedestrian access to and from the site. To protect the health, welfare and safety of residents, customers, and employees, snow removal on all sidewalks shall begin with a trigger depth of ½”, with a continuous effort until the snow event has ceased and complete cleanup has occurred. 7. All sidewalks shall be maintained free from ice at all times. 8. Snow must be hauled from the site to an off-site location. 9. To ensure pedestrian and vehicular safety, the installation of any on-site traffic calming measures not indicated on the official exhibits, including speed bumps, shall require a major amendment to the Planned Unit Development. 10. Architectural standards shall be maintained in accordance with the official exhibits; any design modifications reducing the amount of Class I materials shall require a major amendment to the PUD. 11. All utility lines and structures must be placed underground or inside the building. Staff shall verify that construction documents include the placement of all utilities lines or structures underground or inside the building prior to issuance of the building permit. 12. Construction plans shall indicate the location of the concrete wash-out area, which shall not be located on any required landscaping areas. 13. The developer shall pay an administrative fine of $750.00 per violation of any condition of this approval. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. Pursuant to Section 36-367(e)(6) of the Zoning Ordinance, the City will require execution of a development agreement as a condition of approval of the Final P.U.D. The development agreement shall address those issues which the City Council deems appropriate and necessary. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute the development agreement. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 2, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 15 Excerpts Official Minutes – Planning Commission Oct. 7, 2009 4. Hearings A. Hotel Proposal – Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD Location: 600 Highway 169 Applicant: CSM/BPG Properties Case Nos.: 09-18-S & 09-19-PUD Adam Fulton, Planner, presented the staff report for a new hotel in the Shelard Park area and reviewed the subdivision variances for the easements and sidewalks. He stated that 51 surface parking spaces are available, which is a surplus. The hotel site will be brought into compliance for stormwater management. Landscaping alternatives have been requested including public spaces, public seating and hardscape landscaping. Trees are being added to every possible portion of the site. The site is adjacent to Shelard Park, which was in the master plan to serve the whole area. The park impacts the DORA (Designed Outdoor Recreation Area) calculation and the park dedication. The park dedication occurred when this area was previously platted. Through the PUD process the applicant is allowed a DORA reduction of half. Mr. Fulton noted that the request is scheduled to go before the City Council on November 2nd. Commissioner Morris asked for clarification about the utility easement variance. Mr. Fulton replied the variance was requested due to some existing site conditions, which would create a hardship to put in those easements. He explained the easement to the south of Lot 1 abuts right up against the property and an easement for drainage and utility can’t be put into the parking ramp. Similarly at the hotel property, because of the conditions that exist with the turnaround circle, it is not possible to add the full 10-foot easement, but they were putting in a 5-foot utility and drainage easement. Mr. Fulton stated that staff felt the easements were not necessary for drainage or utilities. Chair Kramer asked about the crossing and if the entire parking ramp would empty past that area or would it just be the surface lot? Mr. Fulton replied it was just the surface lot. There is also access from the frontage road to the lot. John Ferrier, CSM Corporation, introduced the development team. He said the team agreed with the findings of the staff report. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 16 Commissioner Morris stated the Planning Commission had an opportunity to review this item at a study session which was very helpful and eliminated a lot of questions the Commission might normally ask at a public hearing. Chair Kramer opened the public hearing. Sandra Huber, 330 Ford Road, #8, asked about the turnaround on Ford Road. Mr. Fulton replied there would be a new turnaround to the north of the 600 Tower. Staff looked at the traffic and when they looked at the hotel use, it was off-peak use from the office. Kelly Gibbel, owner BPG Properties, discussed the turnaround and believed Ms. Huber was referring to a turnaround at the 300 Building, which was not a part of this project. It would not be the same type of drive. It was basically a one-way drop off. Ms. Huber expressed concerns about additional traffic and crime in the area and potential for car break-ins. She said it was hard to get in and out of the condo development with additional traffic. Jerry Kern, 1155 Ford Rd, #316, stated he supported development of the five-star hotel, but was disappointed that the Santorini site was not being redeveloped. He commented that the hotel proposal would make that quadrant a lot nicer and he thought it was terrific and would increase local property values. He said he liked to see progress in the area. Nadia Ablamunets, 1155 Ford Road, #510, asked if anything was proposed at the Santorini site. Mr. Fulton replied that site was not part of this application. Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, added there had been several development discussions on the Santorini site, but there were no proposals currently. Ms. Ablamunets said she was concerned about the project obstructing views and being able to see people in the hotel. Chair Kramer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Robertson said he felt the Commission had reviewed this thoroughly at a study session and he felt it was a strong project. Commissioner Johnston-Madison indicated she understood the concerns about traffic. She said she felt in the long run, the traffic impact would be less than anticipated. She felt it was a good project. Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b) Page 17 Commissioner Carper stated he believed this was a good process and he thanked staff for their work. He said revisions had been made based on the preliminary discussions, which made it easier to approve at this time. Commissioner Person asked if the sidewalk along the service road would be constructed as part of the project or if it would be postponed. Mr. Fulton replied the sidewalk would be up to the north edge of the hotel property and down to the Santorini site. Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat with subdivision variances and Preliminary PUD, subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. WAYZATA BLVD FORD RD INTERSTATE 394 HIGHWAY 169 SSB HWY169 S TO WB I394 FORD LN EB I394 TO NB HWY169 S NB HWY169 S TO WB I394 S H E L A R D P K W Y EB I394 TO SB HWY169 S SB HWY169 S TO EB I394HIGHWAY 169 SWAYZATA BLVD FORD RDINTERSTATE 394 CSM / Marriot Hotel Preliminary PUD and Plat $ October 7, 2009 3 X Zoning Classification R1 - Single Family Residential R2 - Single Family Residential R3 - Two Family Residential R4 - Multi-Familiy Residential RC - Multi-Family Residential POS - Parks and Open Space MX - Mixed-Use C1 - Neighborhood Commercial C2 - General Commercial O - Office IP - Industrial Park IG - General Industrial 360 Feet POS RC C2O RC O O Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 18 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 19 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 20 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 21 COurtyard minneapOlis west st. louis park, minnesota 17 august 2009 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 22 COurtyard minneapOlis west st. louis park, minnesota Site Plan 17 august 2009 prOjeCt details: • 7 story Hotel • 162 Keys • Building Footprint = 211’-7” x 105’-3” • 16,314 GsF parKinG prOVided: 18 18 11 3 (short term) 50 stalls tOtal 0 12.5 25 50 +194 +192 +194 +194 +191 +190 +191 +194 +194 +194 +182 +194 +195 +194 +193 pOrteCOCHere(dashed) entry CirCle new surFaCe parKinG 600 tOwer new pedestrianwalKway newpedestrianwalKway driVe tHrOuGH plaZa dediCated HOtel parKinGeXistinG parKinG ramp 400 east prOpOsed dOra/pOndinG area eXistinG lOadinG dOCK HC HC 18 18 3 eXistinG transFOrmer COnCrete pad scale = 1:50 HOtel mOnument siGn HOtel pylOn siGn trasH Fire pit patiO patiO pOOl t pOOl eQ pOOl stOr st eXerCise rOOm m w OFF OFF wOrK G G eleQuip media pOds lOunGe Business Center tHeater liBrary reCeptiOn dininG marKet VestiBule dininG Bar prep KitCHen FreeZer BreaK stOr meetinG el. meCH laundry serViCe meetinG meetinG meetinG transFOrmer meetinG serViCe HC 11 south west north east FrOntaGe rOad FOrd rOad 15’ setBaCK landsCape BuFFer eXistinGaCCessdriVe realiGned aCCessrOad new surFaCe parKinGlandsCape BuFFer pedestrianwalKway OutdOOr dininG wall Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 23 COurtyard minneapOlis west st. louis park, minnesota 17 august 2009 scale = 1:20 0 5 10 20 divisible meeting595 sF divisible meeting600 sF meeting575 sF meeting440 sf Cl Cl Cl Cl mech365 sF elecstorage prepKitchen715 sF employeeBreak360 sF laundry355 sF serviceelev. st. Bar dining Communal table exercise745 sF pool2,090 sF w m stor. pool eq. t pool stor. Business Center lounge media pods theater library Level 1 Off.Off.work market reception Vestibule lobby4,580 sF Board room 335 sF dining s705 sF G G main Hotel entry east entry patio Courtyard prefunction418 sFV. porte Cochere Outdoor dining Fire pit Ornamental Fence trash & receiving dora pond Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 24 COurtyard minneapOlis west st. louis park, minnesota 17 august 2009 scale = 1:20 0 5 10 20 Elevations west elevation stucco: Color 2 (alternate: metal panel) metal panel: Color 4 metal Cap Flashing : Color 3 stucco: Color 2 (alternate: metal panel) stucco: Color 1 metal panel: Color 4 metal trim: Color 3 Brick: Color 6 (alternate: Glazed Block) precast: Color 7 (polished) store Front Glazingmetal panel: Color 2precast: Color 7 (polished) Brick: Color 5 (alternate: terracotta wall system) Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 25 COurtyard minneapOlis west st. louis park, minnesota 17 august 2009 Conceptual Rendering Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 26 COurtyard minneapOlis west st. louis park, minnesota 17 august 2009 aerial View looking northwest (Conference Center entry) Aerial Context aerial View looking southeast (main entry)aerial looking southwest Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 27 COurtyard minneapOlis west st. louis park, minnesota 17 august 2009 Courtyard looking north approach from 400 east Building pedestrain walk along north side Conceptual Renderings Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 28 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 29 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 30 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 31 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 32 Meeting of November 2, 2009 (Item No. 8b)Page 33