HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/07/13 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
JULY 13, 2009
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:00 p.m. Lilac Park and Beehive Ribbon Cutting / Grand Opening
7:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
Discussion Items
1. 7:00 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning --- July 27, 2009
2. 7:05 p.m. Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results
3. 7:35 p.m. 2009 City Council Bike Ride
4. 7:50 p.m. Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study
5. 8:35 p.m. Minnehaha Creek Partnership
6. 9:05 p.m. Communications (verbal)
9:15 p.m. Adjourn
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the
Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
Meeting Date: July 13, 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:
Future Study Session Agenda Planning – July 27, 2009.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Council and the City Manager meet to set the agenda for the study session on July 27, 2009.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the Council agree with the agenda as proposed?
BACKGROUND:
Attached please find the tentative agenda and proposed discussion items for the study session on
Monday, July 27, 2009.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
None.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
None.
Attachment: Future Study Session Agenda Planning for July 27, 2009
Prepared by: Lisa Songle, Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of July 27, 2009 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Subject: Future Study Session Agenda Planning
Tentative Discussion Items
Study Session, Monday, July 27, 2009 – 6:30 p.m.
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
2. Pandemic Overview– Fire (30 minutes)
The Fire Department will provide the Council with an overview on Pandemics and
Emergency Response/Management.
3. Fire Department Annual Report – Fire (30 minutes)
The Fire Department will present and discuss their 2008 Annual Report with the City
Council.
4. Update on Budget Communication Plan – Budget Feedback Approach– Information
Resources (30 minutes)
On June 22 the Council expressed support for the budget communication plan presented by
staff and asked that additional information be brought back on the web based budget
feedback system being proposed.
5. Communications – Administrative Services (10 minutes)
Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session
for the purposes of information sharing.
Reports
June 2009 Monthly Financial Report – Finance
2nd Quarter 2009 (April-June) Quarterly Investment Report
End of Meeting: 8:15 p.m.
Meeting Date: July 13, 2009
Agenda Item #: 2
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff requests direction from the City Council on the use of excess land sale proceeds.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
How should the city use the proceeds from the sale of land for Move Up homes?
BACKGROUND:
In March the City Council discussed what to do with the approximately $500,000 in excess land
sale proceeds and how to involve the public in the decision. Currently, the city has $428, 000 in
proceeds. With the receipt of the city’s share of the revenue from Hennepin County for the tax
forfeited property, the total land sale proceeds will be $565,526. There are other parcels yet to be
sold that could generate more revenue in the future, but the uncertainty of the housing market
makes it very difficult to project how much additional revenue could be generated and when it will
accrue.
At the March 23rd study session three ideas for the use of the proceeds were discussed. The three
ideas discussed were:
1. Establish a permanent Community Public Art Fund,
2. Use the funds for “green” environmental initiatives; and,
3. Community Center master planning.
These options were chosen based on a desire to use the funds for something of lasting impact, to
address unmet needs, and that was consistent with the city’s Vision.
Webpage Survey Results
The City Council directed staff to seek community input on the three ideas and solicit additional
suggestions. A community survey was placed on the city’s webpage during the month of May to
gather community input. Respondents to the survey were given the opportunity to select any of the
three options and make comments. It was a not a random sampling of residents. Participation in the
survey was “self selected”. Anyone that wanted to participate could do so. However each participant
was limited to only one vote.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results
Over the month the city received 90 responses (specific survey results attached). Of the three
options listed, Environmental Initiatives received the most votes, with 22. The other options of
establishing an Art Fund and Community Center master planning received 6 and 7 votes
respectively.
Specific Environmental Initiatives suggested included :
a) park improvements,
b) restoring/improving wetlands,
c) art in green space,
d) green thinking in public spaces,
e) tree & shrub plantings sometimes in specific locations like along Jordon Avenue,
f) green educational efforts,
g) general improvement of the appearance of the city and our properties,
h) reducing our carbon footprint,
i) measurable environmental initiatives,
j) MN Energy Challenge,
k) greening of existing and planned city facilities,
l) offset damage to our environment from selling city land,
m) new and improved playgrounds.
Two thirds of the respondents proposed spending the money on something other than the 3 options
proposed. Twenty-seven (27) participants proposed to use the funds for city services or other wise
keeping property taxes down; and, 28 proposed using the funds to help SLP schools – (specifically
Park Spanish Immersion) - particularly keeping class sizes small.
Specific ideas proposed by respondents included,
n) affordable housing,
o) city gardens,
p) fix specific streets (Utica),
q) save for future needs,
r) pedestrian/sidewalk improvements,
s) road maintenance,
t) warning lights at Hwy 7 & Louisiana,
u) police budget,
v) general public services (police, fire, streets, etc),
w) larger storm sewer at W26th Street,
x) replace lost MVHC aid,
y) park improvements specifically Northside ice rink and Cedar Knoll,
z) reserves,
aa) wait for more and better ideas,
bb) "necessary and compelling projects" like Hwy 100 over pass widening,
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results
RECOMMENDATION:
While the survey results are not a scientific sampling of resident opinion, the results do show a clear
preference to use the excess land proceeds in a fiscally responsible way that benefits as much of the
community as possible. Of the three areas identified, the results also show a preference to use the
funds for an environmentally beneficial purpose.
For a variety of reasons, including the results from Vision SLP, the results of the survey, and a likely
imminent event that will affect the City environmentally, aesthetically, and economically, staff is
proposing that a sound use of the funds would be for the creation of a more formal boulevard tree
replacement fund or program. Specific details relating to this recommendation are as follows:
Boulevard Tree Replacement Fund/Program
The city is faced with an imminent threat for which it has no identified source of funds with which
to respond. In the coming years the city will be faced with the prospect of losing roughly 4000
boulevard ash trees alone to the Emerald Ash Borer (does not include parks or private property). The
current excess land sale proceeds could fund the replacement of 3000 to 4000 trees, making it
possible to virtually replace all the ash trees in our boulevards in the coming years.
Use of the funds for boulevard tree replacement would be an investment with lasting environmental
and aesthetic benefits to our community. Trees not only provide beauty and shade to our
neighborhoods, they absorb carbon, create oxygen, and provide homes for wildlife and birds.
Using the funds for the replacement of lost trees would be a fiscally prudent thing to do. It
proactively meets an unmet community need. It would provide much needed funds for actual tree
planting; and, also could serve as a valuable source for matching funds for any future tree
replacement grant programs that may be created at the federal or state level to address the emerald
ash-borer problem.
A tree replacement fund or program funded with the land sale proceeds is consistent with the City’s
Vision of being a leader in environment stewardship, promotion of community aesthetics, and
maintenance of the quality of our neighborhoods.
Investments in trees will make a visible difference in the community. It will have a lasting impact
that will grow in community benefit with each passing year as the trees themselves grow to maturity.
NEXT STEPS:
If the City Council is supportive of this idea, staff will prepare more specific program details and
bring them back for approval at a regular Council meeting.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
The creation of a boulevard tree replacement fund would provide a vital source of funding for future
replacement of boulevard trees lost to the emerald ash-borer.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results
VISION CONSIDERATION:
The proposed boulevard tree replacement initiative is consistent with the City’s Vision Strategic
Directions - St. Louis Park’s commitment to being a leader in environmental stewardship,
promoting and integrating aesthetics into the City and maintaining our housing and neighborhoods.
Attachments: Survey Results
Prepared by: Cindy S. Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
1 of 11
Excess Land Proceeds Survey
1. City staff has suggested that the approximately $500,000 in Land Sales Proceeds be spent in one of three ways:
1) Establishing a permanent community art fund 2) Enhancing environmental initiatives 3) Use for possible
community center master planning Please share with us your thoughts on these options.
Response
Count
90
answered question 90
skipped question 0
Response Text
1 The Money should be used to pay for repairs or expenses. It is the responsible
thing to do in times like this. Goverment needs to live within its means like a
household has to. Sometimes you just have to not look for a new way to spend
money.
May 1, 2009 6:54 PM
2 I believe Option 2) would benefit everyone in the community. Not necessarily the
case with Options 1) and 3).
May 1, 2009 7:09 PM
3 I like the idea of using it for Community Center Planning as long as there is a
commitment to backing it up with funding. if it is strictly an academic exercise, I
would suggest skipping it. One other thought is to focus on neighborhoods and
enhancing community parks. Currently, neighborhood parks are not designed but
rather just a bunch of amenities plopped down without much apparent thought as
to how they all go together. These parks are critically important to families in the
park. You could take 1/5 of that money and put together some quick prototype
plans that address ADA accessibility, aesthetics and how all the pieces fit
together. A relatively small investment for maximum community benefit. You
could also put that money towards upgrading the Civic campus.
May 1, 2009 7:12 PM
4 Use for possible community center master planning May 1, 2009 7:27 PM
5 Please spend the money on necessary things like grants to help homeowners
update/green their homes. A community art fund is totally ridiculous in economic
times like this. Or use it for thing that our property taxes currently pay for so we
can get a little relief. I didn't appreciate having my property value go down and my
taxes go up.
May 1, 2009 7:36 PM
6 #1 - absolutely NO!
#2 - NO
#3 - Not enough information
#4 & 5 reduce property taxes - yes, and yes
May 1, 2009 9:05 PM
7 New and improve existing playgrounds May 1, 2009 9:31 PM
8 The money should be used to generate more citizen involvement such that their
time & psychological investment in the city multiplies the value of the investment
in manifold ways. For example, the city has encouraged neighbors/individuals to
beautify their neighborhoods by planting flower gardens. However, citizens get
discouraged without any support from the city in terms of water access and
perhaps a small number of start-up plants or seasonal annuals. Believe me, high-
visibility flower gardens bring people out of their houses & they start to discover
one another! I've seen it happen!
May 1, 2009 9:38 PM
9 2 May 1, 2009 9:58 PM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 5
2 of 11
Response Text
10 How about none of the above. Use the city's money to pay the cities bills and
return to the taxpayers money to the taxpayers.
May 2, 2009 12:03 AM
11 use the money to enhance environmental initiatives May 2, 2009 2:57 AM
12 A Community art fund would help SLP "keep up with" other western/southwestern
suburban areas. Hopkins has a beautiful center for the arts, as does
Bloomington. However, even if something like that is not viable, it IS important to
support the arts in our community. One of things Don Bates (Hopkins Westwind
Band) says all the time (he was my high school band director and I've played with
Westwind off and on since it's beginning) is that at some point your body is going
to prevent you from playing football, basketball, tennis, or whatever sport, but you
can act, sing, play an instrument, paint, and write for the rest of your life.
May 2, 2009 12:44 PM
13 I think the idea of using the money for a community center is a very good one and
hope that will be your choice. Our recreation center is great but a community
center would be something everyone in the city could use and enjoy. Thanks for
asking! Phyllis McQuaid, 8200 W. 33rd St., Apt. 101
May 2, 2009 5:12 PM
14 How about fixing tica Avenue. We were told it was too expensive - $135,000
quoted. You could do that and still have some left over to reduce our taxes!!
May 2, 2009 5:18 PM
15 I'd like to see the community center be a top priority since this is an area where I
feel suburbs like Hopkins and Minnetonka have done a great job. Since I would
love to see that center be a place where arts could be performed (with a main
stage for community and school theater and to bring in music acts, encourage
faith communities to offer special events, alternative services, etc.) and staged
(such as temporary galleries, classroom spaces to teach community education,
etc. As such, a strong arts focus would be supported by this initiative.
May 2, 2009 8:10 PM
16 While all of these options are fine ideas that will contribute to the community,
there needs to be further thought on this topic before spending this money. In a
time when residents are continually being asked to vote bond issues up or down
relating to our children's education and continually being threatened with the loss
of teaching jobs and larger class sizes, I feel that this is a serious misuse of these
funds. PLEASE give this further thought. Although $500,000 is a relatively small
amount in the city's budget, this could go a long way to shore up gaps in the
education budget. Thank you.
May 2, 2009 10:23 PM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 6
3 of 11
Response Text
17 To whom it may concern:
First off let me introduce myself. I am Bill Levine and my second grader and
kindergartner are both students at PSI. I have been teaching in the metro area for
the past 33 years, 20 of which were teaching third, fourth, and sixth grades. I am
currently teaching eighth grade English. I recently discovered that there is a
situation at PSI that will adversely impact our second and third graders education
next year, 2009-2010. This is related to our current economic condition in the
state and district, and how inadequately the state funds education. To balance
the budget, the Saint Louis Park School Board has directed PSI to cut one full
time classroom teacher. As the plan currently stands, our second and third grade
classrooms at PSI next year will be over 30 children.
Here are some facts:
1. The School Board is requiring PSI to cut one full time position for next year, and
they have stated that the cut must be made by eliminating one classroom section.
2. This year’s second grade class has 95 students, four sections with an average
of 24 per section. Next year there will only be three sections of third grade with an
average of 32 per section. This is without adding or taking away a section.
3. This year’s first grade has 91 students in four sections with an average of 23
per section. The current plan is to eliminate/cut one section of second grade,
meaning that the 91 students, plus maybe five students on the waiting list that
may test in would equal 96 students next year in second grade. That would mean
about 30-32 second grade students per class in each of three sections.
Research suggests that class size in grades K-3, the primary years, should never
exceed 25, and optimal is around 20. To think that our children will be in classes
of 30-32 next year is unconscionable. I understand that cuts need to be made to
balance the budget, but I thought the outcome from last years parent survey
stated that cuts should be made away from the classroom. It’s clear that small
class size has a direct bearing on achievement, and young children need more
teacher attention, especially during the primary years. Being a teacher of 33
years, I can attest to the fact that it’s just difficult to address the needs of all
students when you have 30 or more in a class. So where do we go from here?
In times like these, when our community is being forced to put our childrens
education on the line, can we really afford to fund the above proposals? These
our are children, our future. If we choose to fund the above proposal we are
putting our children and their education behind a community center master plan,
we can clearly not afford. This is not what St. Louis Park wants for our families or
our future. This does not represent the priorities of this community. Please use
these funds generated by the city of St Louis Park To save our childrens
education.
May 3, 2009 4:34 AM
18 So far I'm exremely disappointed in the "art" money that has been spent in this
community. I love art, but what I've seen is just a plain waste of money.
And I just don't understand the assumption that the money must be automatically
"spent". That money should go back to the property owner's in tax relief. Or at
least plug holes in the deficit, or put aside for future NEEDS (not wants).
If the money MUST be "spent", then I wish just once some revenue would be
spent on something the taxpaying (childless) adults in this community could
acutally use and enjoy (like nice adult gym at the Rec Center). I'm very tired of
footing the bill for all the kids/families activites - it's endlessly skewed to benefit
the minority.
Aren't childless single people the majority of tax-payers in this town? Please think
about their needs/desires too instead of just using them as cash cows for endless
spending schemes.
May 3, 2009 6:11 PM
19 I prefer enhancing environmental initiatives. If we're going to sell land that will
likely be developed, we have to find ways to offset the damage we are doing to
the environment in the process.
May 4, 2009 2:24 PM
20 Use for sidewalks and trails throughout the city.May 4, 2009 2:56 PM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 7
4 of 11
Response Text
21 Number 2 is my preferred option because of initiatives that could generate cost-
savings for the City, which would then free of money to tackle #1 or #3. That said,
I assume that #2 will put money into the "greening" of existing and planned City
facilities.
May 4, 2009 3:44 PM
22 I like option #1 best:
1) Establishing a permanent community art fund
May 4, 2009 4:25 PM
23 Green is the way of the future. I would like to see the funds go towards enhancing
envornmental initiatives.
May 4, 2009 8:12 PM
24 I'd like the proceeds to be used towards environmental initiatives that can typically
have a very measurable impact. St. Louis Park is a great city to live in. We can
do activities such as the MN Energy Challenge and other initiatives to make our
city great for families for decades to come.
May 5, 2009 12:26 AM
25 I support establishing a permanent community art fund as the only Arts funding in
SLP comes via a SLP Friends of the Arts Grant.
This year they gave grants totalling approx $22,000 to many recipients. But these
grant levels, while very important to local artists, are not sufficient enough to
support larger community efforts such as The Park Theater Company.
TPTC is currently working under Friends of the Arts to resstablish Community
Theater in SLP after a long absence. A Land Sale Proceeds Art Fund would be a
huge step by the City to show support for an all-inclusive, community-based
theater that is open to every SLP resident.
May 5, 2009 6:48 PM
26 We have a community center, we have plenty of art programs, environmental
choices are made by individuals... Put the money into the school district so they
won't have to increase class size in the 2nd and 3rd grades, this is a vulnerable
time for kids and the class sizes are already larger than recommended. Well
educated kids are better members of the community, they value arts and the
environment.
May 5, 2009 6:57 PM
27 Use the money for St. Louis Park schools, class sizes will increase without it!!! May 5, 2009 7:11 PM
28 Use the money for the schools. We already have the above three choices. May 5, 2009 7:12 PM
29 MONEY FOR SCHOOL DISTRICT! Direct these proceeds to the schools to
prevent increased class sizes and elimination of programs!! Please!
May 5, 2009 7:15 PM
30 Please put the money into our schools, they desperately need it. People won't
stay in St. Louis Park if the schools keep going downhill.
May 5, 2009 7:30 PM
31 Put the money into the school district!!!! so they won't have to increase class size
in the 2nd and 3rd grades, this is a vulnerable time for kids and the class sizes are
already larger than recommended. Well educated kids value arts and the
environment, and are better members of the community
May 5, 2009 7:36 PM
32 If possible, use the money to assist the school district with budget cuts and
funding shortfalls. We need to be educating the future leaders of our city, state
and country! Quality schools draw people into the community.
Second choice would be to enhance the existing Rec Center/Wolfe Parke area.
May 5, 2009 7:41 PM
33 Though these three initiatives are valuable, I don't know of any better way to
spend money than on enhansing the classroom education and outreach to
disadvantaged kids . Discuss distributing these funds to Aquila and Cedar Manor,
keeping class sizes down.
May 5, 2009 8:30 PM
34 Putting the cash into the existing school systems where they are planning on
increasing class size for 2nd and 3rd graders. The school district IS a vital part of
the city ...for example many families stay IN THE PARK just because of Spanish
Immersion. If it weren't for PSI, I would have moved to Minnetonka for a cheaper,
similar size house.
angie aramsperger@comcast.net
May 5, 2009 8:39 PM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 8
5 of 11
Response Text
35 I think that using the money towards an art fund is a very ineffective way of using
the money. No more than 5% of the community will benefit from this option.
Enhancing environmental initiatives (whatever that means) seems like an effective
way of investing the money.
May 6, 2009 12:38 AM
36 community art fund May 6, 2009 2:36 AM
37 I would love to see this money go towards K-12 education to keep class sizes
from getting too big, and to keep gym, music, and art in a prominent part of the
curriculum. K-12 education is suffering. Too many things are being cut. Teachers
are asked to do too much. Class sizes are too big to be effective. Even if residents
don't have kids in school, we all benefit as a society from having healthy children
who are in an optimal environment for learning. They grow up to be teenagers,
adults, citizens living in our community. They are the future. I don't think we need
another community center. Thank you for asking for input.
May 6, 2009 3:10 AM
38 Our school district is cutting physical education classes, arts classes, and
teachers causing an increase in elementary class sizes to over 30. Children
should not be in an elementary class with more than 25 kids and our teachers,
although extremely competent, should not be expected to teach a class of over 25
kids. Let's put "Children First" and put the money from the land sold to build
homes for families into the school district with the sole purpose of reducing class
sizes in elementary school. Educated children value the arts and will work for the
environment. Keeping our teachers happily teaching in our community will keep
our school district in the top tier of the metro. Let's put the money in education to
keep families here, like those who bought the land to build the homes geared for
families.
May 6, 2009 3:18 AM
39 In your comment notes (council), it is stated that the interest amount anticipated
would be "approx. $5000-$8000" per year (that's 1-2% return). That amount
seems especially conservative even in these unusual economic times. Perhaps
the city is limited to certain low-return types of investments, but most interest
bearing accounts in well-managed funds have been averaging closer to 5-8%
annually or more. I believe that a judicial selection of a specific account for these
monies would have the potential for much greater interest dollars. Please consider
selection of a more flexible and better interest-returning location for these funds.
The city and the citizens deserve the opporunity to maximize the dollars - it's the
city's fuduciary responsibility to do so!
May 6, 2009 11:24 AM
40 Please consider the school district for the money. The schools have been cut to
the bare bones, our young people in this community could use the help.
May 6, 2009 2:30 PM
41 I honestly feel that the proceeds should go into the school system. I was born and
raised here in Park, and I now have a family of my own and I'm beginning to see
how Park is taking huge hits in the education field. This used to be the best place
to raise your kids and have them attend school, I think we need to get that back
and not cut more classes but put forth the money in enhancing those classes.
May 6, 2009 2:46 PM
42 lower class sizes put the money back in the schools- the classes are way too big. May 6, 2009 4:41 PM
43 We have a community center, we have plenty of art programs, environmental
choices are made by individuals... Put the money into the school district so they
won't have to increase class size at PSI in the 2nd and 3rd grades, this is a
vulnerable time for kids and the class sizes are already larger than recommended.
Well educated kids value arts and the environment, and are better members of
the community.
The suggestions listed as option in this survey are ridiculous- Our kids come first-
art is important- but not more than our children and the teaching environment in
the school.
May 6, 2009 6:09 PM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 9
6 of 11
Response Text
44 Children First!! Use some for schools -- 2nd and 3rd Grade teacher. Keep class
size low, schools quality high and families will stay in SLP.
Focus on neighborhood & park improvements that all residents will benefit from.
Strengthen the community through neighbor interaction -- bringing people of all
generations and all walks of life together. More pedestrian friendly streets in
Eliot Neighborhood and other "north" neighborhoods -- side walks are needed!!
Extend the current bike trail/ walking path east to the new West End retail/theater
area.
May 6, 2009 6:11 PM
45 given the budget shortfalls in the SLP schools, i would recemmend a donation to
the school district to offset increased class sizes (esp in the elementary grades).
lower student-teacher ratios give benefit ALL community members with happier
kids/teacher/families because kids are receiveing the time and attention they
deserve during critical school development years.
May 6, 2009 6:28 PM
46 SLP already has enough great art programs May 6, 2009 6:34 PM
47 I'd like to see this go to schools first. If it has to be one of these three options I'd
chose environmental initiatives which is a necessity. The other 2 are luxuries, in
fact, establishing an art fund in this time of economic crisis would be incredibly
wasteful. Please list in the park perspective who suggested the art fund so I know
if it was a city council member I could avoid voting for. Thanks
May 6, 2009 6:53 PM
48 Put the money into the school district so they won't have to cut staff. Education
should be our top priority. Well educated kids value arts and the environment,
and are better members of the community.
May 6, 2009 7:06 PM
49 Please put the money where the need is greatest...K-12 education! Therefore, in
the future we will have well-educated children that value the environment, the arts
and community.
May 6, 2009 8:06 PM
50 I like these in the order of 3, 2, 1. Our SLP RecCenter is really nice, but it would
be also nice to have a community center with indoor swimming, possibly an indoor
playground and some sort of gym/workout facilities.
May 6, 2009 9:07 PM
51 I feel that the best use of these funds would be to replace some of the
programming, class size increases in the schools that are currently present and
planned for the future. An educated population in SLP is what would be in our
community's best interest. All 3 of the above proposals are luxuries, and
educating our future generations is a priority if not a necessity.
May 6, 2009 9:31 PM
52 None of the above. Either a invest it for future or it should be used to fund a
school district that is forcing out teachers and causing classroom overcrowding.
May 6, 2009 11:12 PM
53 I would support any of the options, but I would like to see something that would
allow for a sense of rallying the community (i.e. something that would draw people
together). This could be through environmental activities or a community center
project. Any money spent for consultants to projects must be portioned off so that
the bulk of the funds could go to the actual project and not just the assessment.
May 7, 2009 12:54 AM
54 We already have a community center. We could definately use the money in
education, so class class size can remain managable so all students get the
attention they need to learn.
May 7, 2009 12:46 PM
55 At this crucial time in the economy, it seems the money would be best spent
where we are forced to make cuts. We have been blessed with outstanding
schools and education in St. Louis Park and putting the money back into the
school district budget (where we are continually forced to make cuts) would have
a very significant and lasting impact on our community as a whole. Many families
stay in SLP not for the size of the homes, but for our schools. Let's keep those
families here! We moved here 11 years ago to our "starter" home. When our
children reached school age (now in 1st and Kingergarten), we researched many
districts, charter schools, etc. We stayed here because of the schools. Now I'm
afraid my children will get lost in a sea of over 30 students in their classes next
year!!!
May 7, 2009 1:07 PM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 10
7 of 11
Response Text
56 Since you took the land, the only alternative is to do #2. I would suggest restoring
the wetland next to the old parkland you sold.
May 8, 2009 12:52 AM
57 I think these extra funds should go directly into funding teachers at the 2nd and
3rd grade levels throughout the district.
We have a community center and several community buildings already. There is
already enough art opportunities in our community and also there are enough
environmental initiatives. Put this money to good use in our schools!
May 8, 2009 2:24 AM
58 I have a wonderful idea for you today: The City of SLP could receive a
tremendous amount of positive press and notoriety if this money is returned to the
taxpayers. While the amount to each taxpayer probably would not be terribly
significant, the idea that our City continues to be on the forefront of fiscally
responsible government- I suspect the positive press would far outweigh any
benefit we would receive from the 3 staff suggestions. I very much encourage
you to return this money to taxpayers - or at a minimum, help reduce the cost of
the new fire station. As part of that encouraging, I also implore you to get the
word out to local TV, internet and news media outlets. I would gladly volunteer to
do so if you are willing to return this money. We all need everyone to be fiscally
responsible if we are to have an economic recovery. The City of SLP could yet
again prove to be a leader by returning this money. Thank you for your time. Jon
Kuskie - 1660 Princeton Ave. S. 612-802-9772
May 8, 2009 2:08 PM
59 This is ridiculous. Hire 10 more teachers or bring back the marching band or do
something for these kids with no extracurricular activities. "The Arts" should be
the LAST priority!!
May 8, 2009 8:46 PM
60 I prefer option 3 from the list. Alternatively, use funds for acquiring public green
space, or the rights for the public to use private green space.
May 8, 2009 10:29 PM
61 Use the money for a warning (blinking) sign on #7 and Louisiana. Or use it on
maintenance of roads, or give the Police Dept. more money.
We don't need a community art fund! We have a community center! Environment?
Spend more $$ on reaching SLP residents about environmental issues.
Gaye Swenson
8814 Stanlen Road
St. Louis Park, 55426
May 8, 2009 11:45 PM
62 If the Cities goal is to provide "fiscally responsible services", take the $500,000
and apply it towards any of the following: police, fire, streets, sewer/water. Forget
about spending it on peripheral issues. APPLY IT TOWARDS THE BASIC
SERVICES A CITY IS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE.
May 9, 2009 12:13 AM
63 Seems loss of open space by building on empty lots and sale of the park at belt
line and 36th etc., would dictate that proceeds from sales should be dedicated to
environmental improvement. Planting trees and enhancing natural areas is most
appropriate. Old trees are cut down few trees are replaced. Art is wonderful, but
some of the development funds should be reserved for maintenance from the
start. Similarly capital budget should go toward civic center building not proceeds
from sale of open space.
May 9, 2009 1:45 PM
64 I would like to see the money spent on environmental initatives such as - more
green space - more trees - more & better recycling - more bike paths so people
drive less - reducing pollution - wildlife protection - and other ways to enhance the
natural environmental in our city.
May 9, 2009 10:55 PM
65 Why the big hurry to spend? In this economic climate I would be inclined to save
this money in a rainy day fund to insulate the City from further cutbacks from
State/County contributions or other unexpected cutbacks. You can always spend
it later IF the economy improves and revenues are healthy..................Bradley
Widseth
May 10, 2009 6:53 PM
66 I vote for enhancing environmental initiatives.May 11, 2009 1:33 AM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 11
8 of 11
Response Text
67 I would like to see the money put toward educating our children or improving their
environment. While I think art is important, I feel well educated children are more
important, and putting money toward keeping our class sizes small is one step to
that end. Keeping our teachers is more important to me than art.
Also, I feel that anything we can do to improve our caring for the planet and our
drinking water is an important cause.
May 11, 2009 8:02 PM
68 Environmental initiatives are important. Also, please consider affordable housing. May 12, 2009 1:07 AM
69 Use the money to help fund the installation of a larger storm sewer at 26th Street
& Princeton. The present sewer is totally inadequate. This would "enhance
enviornmental initiatives.
May 13, 2009 9:54 PM
70 I have lived in St. Louis Park for almost 8 years and love it. I recently read about
the city trying to decide what to do with extra money from land sales and would
like to share my opinion. I think spending the money on the city staff members'
suggestions of community art, environmental initiatives, or a community center
are all well and good; however, times are tough and I think it's COMPLETELY
ridiculous that the city of looking at a loss of $632,000 in state funds from a
Market Value Homestead Credit but yet they want to spend money on things that
are totally frivolous is ridiculous. Now is the time for fiscal responsibility--taking
care of debts, cutting expenses, etc. not the time to be wastefully spending
money. I understand that certain people think there is a great reluctance to use
these funds for a gap in the general fund. Well I say, too bad. It's time to grow
up, be responsible, take care of debts or even better yet, why doesn't the city
consider giving some of this money back to the citizens to offset the increase in
taxes all around on a local, state & federal level. Times are getting so out of
control. Please don't waste this money on things we DO NOT need!!!!!
May 14, 2009 2:20 AM
71 Use the proceeds from the parcels designated as park/open space to enhance the
remaining adjacent land. Use the proceeds from the other parcels for enhancing
environmental initiatives.
May 14, 2009 3:12 PM
72 I support #1 (Establishing a permanent community art fund), especially
maintenance of new and exiting artworks.
May 14, 2009 4:36 PM
73 St. Louis Park needs a community center that serves all residents. The current
Rec Center serves a very small subset of SLP residents, namely ice
skaters/hockey players and outdoor swimmers. We recently moved to SLP from
Chaska and their Community Center is a model of excellence. A Community
center like that will attract families to the SLP housing market. It is an excellent
long-term investment for the city.
May 14, 2009 9:10 PM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 12
9 of 11
Response Text
74 My name is Tony Carlson and I'm the resident at 8419 Virginia Circle N in SLP.
While the above ideas are worthy of consideration, I'd like the city council to
consider the following ideas:
1) Consider a one-time property tax "rebate" for SLP residents. Property taxes
are due tomorrow, the 15th, and while it's paid to Hennepin County the City of
SLP could be proactive and initiative - marketing a campaign to equitably
distribute the $500,000 to it's residents proportionately based on assess market
value of homes. Even if it's only a couple hundred per person residents will be
happy and I could envision the city of SLP getting a lot of positive press.
2) Consider re-building or re-structuring the park at Cedar Lake Road and
Louisiana Avenue. From what I read in the paper it sounds like the hockey rink at
this park will be removed to accomodate the expansion of the Fire Station. While
I recognize the need for appropriate Fire Stations I was upset to learn it costs us
nearby residents our favorite outdoor hockey rink. I myself play there often, and
some of my fondest memories come from outdoor hockey with my friends and
family. The rink is usually crowded with families and kids and it's a valuable
service that gives kids a healthy, winter activity. Perhaps use the funds to
investigate if the site can accomodate both the updated Fire Station while
retaining the hockey rink.
Thank you for you consideration. Please feel free to contact me via e-mail or
phone with any questions.
Tony Carlson
8419 Virginia Circle N.
St. Louis Park, MN
952-994-7917 - mobile
tony.carlson@comcast.net
May 14, 2009 9:50 PM
75 In my opinion none of the options are close to being appropriate. Maybe we
should consider making sure that our city pensions are completely funded. Then
we might consider a one time decrease in the mill rate. This is the citizens
money. I know this is an easy shot but based upon the experience with the
wireless project the 500k should be spent shoring up the finances. You might
want to take into consideration that funding from the state is going to be reduced.
I am a fiscal conservative but we have plenty of buildings to handle community
events, an art fund is very soft and environmental initiatives need to be evaluated.
Go back to the drawing board.
May 15, 2009 12:44 AM
76 I think that in this time of economic distress, it is foolish to use the money for a
permanent art fund. If you want to make an impact on our children, why don't you
take a look at the budget cuts in our school district and the needs that the various
schools have. It might be foolish to use it in any of the three ways listed. If
people are jobless, homeless, and hungry who cares if we have any of the those
three things listed. What about giving some of it toward STEP for their building
need? They are busier than ever serving this community.
May 15, 2009 2:47 AM
77 Why does the money NEED to be spent?May 15, 2009 2:20 PM
78 I think it outrageous thqat staff is deciding how to spend the taxpayer's money.
Our council members should be soliciting input from the voters directly to them.
In times like these, I would suggest spending only on necessary and compelling
projcts. In the meantime, hold then funds in reserve. if there is no compelling
need, return them to the taxpayers.
May 16, 2009 4:12 PM
79 This is a critical time for the environment. Anything that can be done to reduce our
carbon footprint would be my priority. It seems to me that the most direct approx is
the installation of solar panels or green roof. It has the most direct impact.
Along that thought what is happening with the city internet service. One of the
reasons I chose to to purchase a home in SLP was the impending installation of
internet service (solar powered). Has city internet service been completely
abandoned? Seems like a breach of community faith to just drop it all together.
What happened to the funds designated for it and/or recovered from company that
installed the system -
May 18, 2009 1:03 PM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 13
10 of 11
Response Text
80 None of these. At a time like this, we should be using the money for buget items
so that our local and property taxes stop increasing!
May 19, 2009 5:40 PM
81 I think city staff should watch the news We are in the largest economic recession
since before WWII. The state just said they were going to decrease fees paid to
local governments, which will inevitably cause increased property taxes, which will
in turn create further difficulty for already battered homeowners. I personally am
having a garage sale this summer, and I plan on using that windfall money to help
have a cash back up fund. Maybe the city should take a lesson from homeowners
like me who plan to be more fiscally responsible. If you want to do something
artsy, enforce city code that makes people mow their lawns and cut down the
trees that grow up against their house and block their windows, or make people
clean up the alley portion of their lots. The city would be prettier, it would be free
to the city, and property values would increase. Do we honestlly need another
community center. If you have to pay a consultant to tell you what to put in it, do
you really need it? Put the money aside as a safety net, spare us a property tax
increase please. You want to keep families in St Louis Park, then stop spending
our money in irresponsible ways. P.S. I use Parkview park almost daily 8 months
a year. It's a great park, does it really need $20,000 in new playground
equipment. Just because somebody stole the dinosaur doesn't mean it needs to
be completely redone.
May 20, 2009 3:58 AM
82 I do not think a community center is a priority. Enhancing environmental initiatives
is my vote for all of the obvious reasons and it could be utilized to improve the
appearance of some locations in an environmentally friendly way. While improving
the appearance of the city may be a valuable goal, I don't believe the art is a
current priority. Do something attractive, possibly with an educational aspect, in
the environmental area.
May 20, 2009 10:03 PM
83 Our household vote would be for option 2; enhancing environmental initiatives and
we would also like to see initiatives beyond residential; demonstrating green
thinking in public spaces as well.
May 21, 2009 3:34 AM
84 use for enhancing environmental initiatives May 22, 2009 2:53 PM
85 500 k won't go far for #2. #3--is it really necessary? These are trying times; a
new community center?? Yes, 500 k is a sizable chunk for an art fund for a city
this size, but the number of other priorities is huge. Where is the thought to
contribute to highway 100 overpass widening, or creating a reserve fund so that
when the next shortfall happens, school services don't have to be cut, or other city
services can run interrupted?
May 25, 2009 8:15 PM
86 I believe the city should direct the land proceeds toward enhancing environmental
initiatives. Enhancing environmental initiatives is the most responsible choice
because the largest amount of population will benifit from it. One project that I
would like to see put in place is planting of trees and shrubs along Jodan Ave. S,
along the fence that seperates the freeway from the neighborhood. The sound
and pollution has been a major problem for residents in the neighborhood;
planting trees and shrubs in this area would block some of the noise, create an
area for birds to nest, and resolve the problem without the cost and construction
involved with putting up a sound barrier.
Thank you for your consideration,
Christy Eckenrode
May 26, 2009 3:14 PM
87 Save the money in a Rainy day fund. Invest (in safe investments) and use the
interest in the Rainy Day fund.
May 26, 2009 6:55 PM
88 We should not be told by city staff what to spend the money on. There should not
have been any "leading the citizens" suggestions. In my opinion the money
should be used to assist 10-15 "low income" families purchase and/or build
affordable housing.
May 26, 2009 10:18 PM
89 use for environmental initiatives and the community center planning May 28, 2009 2:42 AM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 14
11 of 11
Response Text
90 We are in favor of the permanent art fund to enrich our citizens. We are even
more enthusiastic about the prospect of integrating the art into outdoor public
green space. With the additional infill housing and new large multi unit projects,
the need for green space is growing more important to maintain and enhance the
quality of life. (We need more spaces in the city that are walkable.) Thanks for
your consideration.
Lawrence and Gail Pitsch, 2633 Huntington AVe So.
Jun 1, 2009 12:53 AM
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 2)
Subject: Excess Land Sale Proceeds – Survey Results Page 15
Meeting Date: July 13, 2009
Agenda Item #: 3
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
2009 City Council Bike Ride.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No formal action requested. Staff desires direction on which proposed bicycle route is of most
interest, or suggest changes to the routes to visit specific points of interest.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council still wish to undertake a bike ride and what would it like to accomplish by
doing so?
BACKGROUND:
In lieu of the annual canoe trip, the City Council requested staff organize a bicycle ride. Since the
Council has previously done a bike ride on the regional trails, staff is suggesting that this ride would
highlight some existing sidewalk or bicycle gaps or proposed improvements as per the recently
drafted sidewalks and trail plan. Staff identified a few possible routes to consider (see attached).
None of the routes proposed are on regional trails. Instead, the routes use mostly local streets and
highlight sidewalk gaps, proposed trails, proposed on-street bikeways, or other points of interest.
Staff requests feedback on the routes being suggested.
Staff suggests scheduling the bike ride for a Saturday morning in September. The vehicle traffic on a
Saturday morning is better than a week day evening. The ride would take approximately 1-2 hours,
depending on the route selected and the number of stops to rest/discuss observations.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
This bike ride is a fun team building event to help further our Vision Strategic Direction #1 - St.
Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community.
Attachments: Route Maps
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Cindy Walsh, Parks and Recreation Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
"ÿ001
!"#493
45675
45675
456752
Bike Lane High Priority
Bike Lane Priority
Narrow Bridge
Freight Rail Study
(Closed Crossing?)
Proposed Crossing
Bridge? Ped only?
Bike Lane or
Trail Priority
Bikeway
Priority
Proposed Trail
Trespass
Crossing
Dakota N/S Route
(CP Reg. Trail Alt.)
Dakota N/S Route
CP Reg Trail Alt.
Dakota N/S Route
(CP Reg Trail Alt.)
Bridge Ramps
Not ADA
West End,
New Trail
Route 1A9.2 milesRoute 1B7.7 milesSidewalk Gap
New Stairway
Trail Access
Adds 1 m
i
l
e
Road Diet?
Reduce from
4 to 3 lanes
Priority
Bikeway
CEDAR L
A
K
E
27TH
INTERSTATE 394
MINNETONKALOUISIANAWAYZATATEXAS
HIGHWAY 100FRANCEJERSEYFLORIDAGEORGIALAKE
HIGHWAY
7KENTUCKYVERNONCOLORADOZARTHAN31ST
25 1/2
TOLEDO16TH
23RD
26THUTICA
INGLEWOODAQUILAVIRGINIA
22ND
32ND PARK PLACEMARYLAND24TH
JOPPAIDAHOHUNTINGTONNEVADAEB I394 TO SB HWY100 SFOREST
RHODE ISLAND394 HOVSB HWY100 S TO WB I394
SALEM29TH
ALABAMAFRANK
L
I
N
KIPLING25TH
18
T
H
30 1/2 GLENHURSTSUNSET
BOONE14TH
ELIO
T
VI
E
W DAKOTABASSWOOD
XYLONQUEBECWEBSTERUTAHRALEIGHYOSEMITE28TH SUMTERGAMBLE
BURD32 1/2 QUENTINVICTO
R
I
A
13TH
LYNN13 1/2
OTTAWANB H
W
Y
1
0
0
S
T
O
E
B I
3
9
4
ZINRANXENWOODCEDARWOODWESTSIDEEDGEWOODNATCHEZ
HAMPSHIREYUKONOREGONPARKLANDSCAVELLPRINCETONWB I394 TO SB HWY100 S
DOUGLAS
BRUNSWICKBLACKSTONEWYOMINGMONTEREYPARKDAL
E
CED
A
R DREWHIG
H
W
O
O
D
PARK PLACE BLVD S TO WB I394
PENNSYLVANIAOLD CEDAR LAKE
PRIVATEWESTWOOD HILLSCEDAR S
H
O
R
E
PARK PLACE BL
V
D
S
T
O
E
B
I
3
9
4
SUMTERYOSEMITE26TH
29TH
28THDAKOTAFR
A
N
K
L
I
N
UTICA32ND
BLACKSTONEHIGH
W
A
Y
7
32ND MONTEREYUTAHFLORIDALOUISIANA
LYNNBOONELYNN23RD EDGEWOOD26TH
TEXASDAKOTAHIG
H
W
AY 7JOPPAOTTAWAJOPPAPENNSYLVANIA31STRHODE ISLANDQUEBECXYLONTOLEDOBOONEBRUNSWICKBLACKSTONEINGLEWOODBOONEAQUILA23RD
UTAHAQUILAZARTHANCEDAR
LAK
E
QUENTINHIGHWAY 100HIGHWAY 10016TH
XENWOOD16TH
JERSEYQUEBEC16TH
29TH FLORIDANATCHEZKENTUCKYOREGONRALEIGH25 1/2MARYLAND14TH
31ST
VIRGINIA28TH
BRUNSWICKQUEBECGLENHURSTFRANKLIN
29TH
29TH
25TH ALABAMA31STNATCHEZGLE
N
H
U
R
S
T
28TH
INTERSTATE 39
4
14TH
PENNSYLVANIA2
5
TH
27TH
32NDQUEBEC WEBSTERGEORGIAVIRGINIA31STHAMPSHIREUTICA31ST
31ST
IDAHOSALEM28THNEVADA
EDGEWOOD27TH
26TH18TH
ALABAMA13TH
26TH GLENHURSTVIRGINIANEVADAYOSEMITECOLORADOSUMTER0 0.50.25
Miles ¯Council Bike Routes 1A & 1B
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 3)
Subject: 2009 City Council Bike Ride Page 2
"ÿ001
45675
456752
Priority
Intersection
Crossing
Freight Rail Study
(Closed Crossing?)
Proposed CrossingBridge? Ped only?
Proposed Trail
Dakota N/S Route
(CP Reg Trail Alt.)Route 2A6.2 milesRoute 2B5.8 milesNew StairwayTrail Access
Alabama Ave
Traffic Calming
Good Bike Route,
Bad Crossing at
Excelsior Blvd
Sidewalk Gap
Priority
Sidewalk
Gap
Priority
Sidewalk
Gap
Priority
Sidewalk
Gap
Rerouted
Trail
Road Diet?
Reduce from
4 to 3 lanes
High Priority
Bikeway
High Priority
Crossing
High Priority
Crossing
Repaved
Trail
High Priority
Bikeway
High Priority
Bikeway
Non-ADA
(Stairs Only)
Ped Bridge
Intermittent
Sidewalks
High Priority
Bikeway
HIGH
W
A
Y
7
29TH
IDAHO28TH
41ST
26TH
FLORIDAGEORGIAYOSEMITE27TH
35TH
34TH
EXCELSIORHAMPSHIRE ALABAMA39TH1ST
WOODDALEWALKER EDGEWOODKIPLINGOTTAWAHIGHWAY 10036TH QUENTINBELT LINEL
I
B
R
A
R
Y
BRUNSWICKUTICAZARTHANCAMBRIDGE
TOLEDOVERNONLYNN37TH
42ND
PARK G
L
E
N
SALEMWEBSTERBROOKSIDE43 1/2
40TH
OXFO
R
D
DAKOTAMINNETONKA
XENWOODGOODRICH
HAMILTON
MORNINGSIDE NATCHEZLAKE
VALLA
C
H
E
R
M
O
N
T
E
R
E
Y2NDRALEIGH
LOUISIANA32ND
BROOKWOLFE
COLORADOB
ROWN
L
OW PRINCETONSERVICEMACKEY33RD
HOSPITAL SERVICE42 1/2
PRIVATEMONI
TO
R
VERMONT
31ST
COOLIDGEG
O
RH
AM BLACKSTONEPARK CENTERPARK
C
O
M
M
O
N
S
BROWNDALEGRANDCAMERATA TOLEDO AVE S TO NB HWY100 SNB HWY100 S TO 36TH ST WPARK NICOLLETAUTO CLUBBRUNSWICK35TH
27TH
RALEIGHALABAMACOLORADO35TH HIGHWAY 100HIGHWAY 7
WAL
KER
32ND
31ST
SALEM26TH
QUENTINRALEIG
HLAKESALEM
WEBSTERXENWOOD32ND TOLEDOUTICAOTTAWA42NDALABAMADAKOTA 28TH
27TH
43 1/2XENWOODYOSEMITE41STVERNON 31ST
ZARTHANHIGH
W
A
Y
7
28TH
HIG
H
WAY 7WOODDALENATCHEZDAKOTA33RD
HIGH
W
A
Y
7
41STDAKOTA 29TH
36TH
RALEIGHWEBSTERSALEM28TH
I
D
AHO
XENWOODLYNNOXFORDBLACKSTONE PRIV
A
T
E MONTEREYWEBSTERYOSEMITEUTICAALABAMACOLORADOBRUNSWICK29TH
33RD
OTTAWA39TH HIGHWAY 100ZARTHANXENWOOD39THZARTHAN LYNNMONTEREYBRUNSWICKTOLEDOYOSEMITE27TH KIPLINGBRUNSWICKSALEMLYNNRALEIGHEDGEWOODWEBSTERZARTHANYOSEMITEMONTEREY33RD
0 0.50.25
Miles ¯Council Bike Routes 2A & 2B
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 3)
Subject: 2009 City Council Bike Ride Page 3
Meeting Date: July 13, 2009
Agenda Item #: 4
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Pursue further analysis/evaluation of the freight rail options being considered by Hennepin County
and their impact on St. Louis Park through hiring a consultant, and encouraging Hennepin County
comply with the scope of work in its freight rail study project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Discuss policy issues related to Southwest Transit Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
Study and Hennepin County’s Freight Rail Study and the recommendations provided by staff.
BACKGROUND:
Southwest Transit
The technical analysis for the draft Southwest Transit DEIS is nearing completion and is ready for
review. Part of the DEIS process includes selection of a “locally preferred alternative” (LPA) route.
The DEIS will focus its evaluation on the LPA. Ultimately it is the LPA that will be recommended
to the Metropolitan Council to be included in the Transportation Policy Plan (TPP) by the
Hennepin County Rail Road Authority (HCRAA) later this fall. Inclusion of the LPA in the TPP is
critical to funding for SWLRT. Four routes are under consideration at this stage of the process (See
attached map and description).
DEIS Reports
The draft DEIS reports completed thus far are as follows:
1 Analysis of Alternative LRT 3C (11th/12th Sub-Alternative
2 Analysis of Alternative LRT 3E
3 Screening Evaluation Criteria
4 Planning Compatibility Evaluation
6 Environmental Evaluation
Additional reports expected shortly include:
5 Mobility
7 Costs
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study
Anticipated Schedule
The following schedule shows the anticipated timeline for studies and decisions for the Southwest
Transitway:
Public Meetings
Public information meetings are scheduled in the participating cities (see attached schedule); one will
be held at St. Louis Park City Hall Council Chambers on Tuesday, August 18th, from 6:30 p.m. to
8:00 p.m. This will cover both the LRT topic and Station Area Planning.
The tentative schedule for the DEIS process is as follows:
Date: Meeting:
July 29 PAC meeting
Aug 18 Open House: Light Rail Routing & Station Area Plans
6:00 pm - 7:30 pm St. Louis Park City Hall
Aug 26 PAC meeting
Sept 17 PAC Public Hearing
Sept 30 PAC recommends route alternative to HC Regional Rail
Authority
Fall Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority finalized DEIS
process and chooses Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA)
Fall Metropolitan Council considers Locally Preferred Alternative and
adds to Transportation Policy Plan
Winter Metropolitan Council begins Preliminary Engineering on Locally
Preferred Alternative
Next Steps for St. Louis Park
1. Review DEIS materials as they are distributed.
2. Evaluate impacts on St. Louis Park.
3. Participate in August 18th Open House.
4. Discuss any issues or stances at a Study Session in August.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 3
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study
Freight Rail Study
Hennepin County has hired consultants to complete a Freight Rail Study. The study was to
“evaluate alternate scenarios for freight rail operations connecting St. Louis Park to St. Paul.”
The full Scope of Work is attached and includes the following tasks:
Task 1: Review Previous Studies
Task 2: Develop Scenarios
Task 3: Freight Rail Operations
Task 4: Environmental Impact Assessment
Task 5: Capital Cost Estimate
Task 6: Issues Assessment
The consultant was to look at a minimum of two scenarios including: (1) continued operations in
the Kenilworth corridor and (2) relocated operations on the CP north/south tracks in St. Louis Park.
The Scope also stated the consultant “shall review the St. Louis Park Railroad Task Force Report,
the Mn/DOT Commuter Rail System Plan, the Dan Patch Commuter Rail Feasibility Study, and
other relevant documents. The study was to provide an environmental impact assessment among
other tasks.
The 1999 Railroad Study undertaken by the City generally supported the discontinuation of freight
rail east of Louisiana Avenue. It identified ten “alternatives” or options for rail improvement plans
in St. Louis Park. All of the options dealt with redirecting freight rail traffic north or south or both
directions after Louisiana Avenue. It even anticipated the possibility of commuter rail in the existing
north-south freight rail route. Another key piece included in the 1999 Rail Study was potential next
steps both for the short term and the long term. These included the possibility of an environmental
impact/mitigation measures study for the rail corridor. An initial scope of work for that study was
included as well. Some work based on the 1999 Railroad Study has been done. Most notably the
remediation and redevelopment of the National Lead (former Golden Auto, now Hwy 7 Corporate
Center) site which has been completed. That project involved substantial grant funding form
Hennepin County and protection of an easement intended to make it possible for rail traffic from
the E-W Canadian Pacific (CP) tracks to smoothly connect to the N-S CP tracks.
It has been 10 years since the St. Louis Park Railroad Task Force Report was completed; the
situation is different on a number of fronts today. What’s more, the preliminary engineering work
done as part of the current Hennepin County RR study suggests that to connect the E-W CP tracks
to the N-S CP tracks is a much bigger and more impactful undertaking than was anticipated in
1999. In light of these changed conditions, additional information is needed to analyze the routing
options for freight rail. The Hennepin County study needs the following work to be completed:
1. County should complete Environmental Impact Assessment as required by the study’s scope.
2. County should complete the Issues Assessment as required by the study’s scope.
3. County should consider other options, including running both freight and light rail in the
Kenilworth corridor (this has been suggested before).
4. County should provide details on cost estimates, including acquisition assumptions and
construction costs in both corridors.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 4
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study
5. County should identify process for choosing an alternative freight route, including:
a. Which agencies ultimately decide on a route?
b. Who pays the costs of moving the route?
c. Who acquires the necessary property? How is it acquired?
d. Who mitigates for impacts of the chosen route? How is it paid for?
6. County should identify what the public process will be prior to making a routing decision.
Next Steps:
Staff recommends the Council discuss the above items and pursue the following course of action:
1. Formally request Hennepin County address the questions above in its study.
2. Take steps to understand the City’s decision-making and legal role in the SW LRT and
freight routing decision.
3. Evaluate further the alternative routes for advantages and disadvantages to the community.
This will require the City to hire a consultant(s) to assist with this analysis.
4. Revisit the issue with further information at an August Study Session.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Consultant services to be paid from the Development Fund. Precise costs are not yet estimated.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community.
Attachments: Map of Alternative Southwest Transitway Routes
Scope of Services for Freight Rail Study
Open House Schedule
Environmental Impact scope of work from 1999 Railroad Study
Executive Summary from 1999 St. Louis Park Railroad Study
Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 5
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study
DEIS Alternative Routes
Alternative Routes Description
1A Along HCRRA r-o-w in west Eden Prairie through
Kenilworth corridor in Mpls
3A Through Town Center and Golden Triangle in Eden Prairie
through Kenilworth corridor in Mpls
3C - Nicollet Mall Through Eden Prairie Town Center and Golden Triangle
through Midtown Greenway to Nicollet and on Nicollet Mall
in Mpls
3C – 11th/12th Sub-alternative Through Eden Prairie Town Center and Golden Triangle
through Midtown Greenway to 1st or Nicollet or Blaisdell
Avenues to 11th Street west to Royalston and Intermodal
Station
3A
1A
3C
3A
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 6
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study
Scope of Services for Freight Rail Study Attachment provided by Hennepin County
Freight Rail Analysis
Purpose:
Evaluate alternate scenarios for freight rail operations connecting St. Louis Park to St. Paul.
History: Twin Cities and Western (TCW) Railroad operates freight rail service between Hopkins
and Minneapolis on trackage owned or leased by the Canadian Pacific Railroad (CP). The original
route to St. Paul was by way of the 29th Street Corridor. The 29th Street Corridor, however, was
severed with the reconstruction of TH 55 (Hiawatha Avenue). As a result of the severance, the
Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) was obligated to perpetuate the rail
service and agreed to reactivate the Kenilworth Corridor on a temporary basis until an alternate
route was developed.
Both CP and TCW have trackage rights over the Kenilworth Corridor through a three way Trackage
Rights Agreement between CP, TCW and HCRRA. In this agreement both CP and TCW owe rent
to HCRRA. Through an independent agreement between CP and TCW, CP must provide TCW a
route from TCW's easterly most extension of its rail line (Tower E-14) to St. Paul. TCW and CP
entered into this agreement when TCW acquired its westerly rail line from CP in the late 1980's
early 1990's.
The Kenilworth Corridor was expected to be a short term solution to the relocation of traffic from
the 29th Street Corridor, but has continued beyond its initial expected life. The corridor now needs
a major rehabilitation or a new route needs to be developed as originally intended.
Scope:
Task 1: Review Previous Studies
The consultant shall review the St. Louis Park Railroad Task Force Report, the Mn/DOT
Commuter Rail System Plan, the Dan Patch Commuter Rail Feasibility Study, and other relevant
documents.
Task 2: Develop Scenarios
The consultant shall evaluate a minimum of two scenarios for the continuation of long-term,
permanent freight rail operations between CP trackage in St. Louis Park and BNSF trackage in west
Minneapolis. The first scenario assumes current freight rail operations in the Kenilworth corridor
owned by the HCRRA are continued on a long-term basis. The second scenario assumes freight rail
operations are discontinued in the Kenilworth corridor and the current TCW service in Kenilworth
is relocated to the CP north-south trackage in St. Louis Park. The termini for both scenarios will be
milepost ____ (Louisiana Avenue) and milepost _______ (the north junction of the Kenilworth
Corridor and BNSF).
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 7
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study
The consultant is encouraged to consider all other possible scenarios that may present themselves as
an alternate means of perpetuating a continuation of TCW service. Any additional alternative shall
be brought to the attention of the HCRRA project manager before any analysis is performed.
Task 3: Freight Rail Operations
The consultant shall work with the affected freight rail companies to determine their future
operating plans and obtain the rail companies’ self assessment of the impact upon their operations of
each scenarios. The consultant shall then make an independent analysis of the impacts to the
operations of each railroad. This task shall consider the potential for future changes in freight rail
technology such as heavier weight trains, etc. The St. Louis Park Freight Rail Task Force Report
should be used as a starting point for this analysis.
The consultant shall briefly evaluate the compatibility of future commuter rail on the alternative
scenarios and its potential for additional/cumulative impacts to freight rail operations.
Task 4: Environmental Impact Assessment
Based upon the results of Task 3, the consultant shall quantify and assess the environmental impacts
associated with both scenarios. The consultant shall use the St. Louis Park Rail Task Force Report
as a staring point for this analysis.
Task 5: Capital Cost Estimate
Based upon the results of Tasks 3 and 4 and relying upon the previous work, the consultant shall
estimate the capital costs for both scenarios. The consultant shall also consider long term
maintenance and operating costs of the alternatives that may be the responsibility of the HCRRA.
Task 6: Issues Assessment
Based upon the analysis contained in Tasks 3-6 and other relevant factors, the consultant shall
develop a method of assessing the scenarios leading to the identification of a preferred scenario.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 8
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study
OPEN HOUSE SCHEDULE:
• Open House: Light Rail Routing & Station Area Plans
August 11, 2009 (6:30 pm - 8:00 pm)
Hopkins City Hall
1010 1st Street S. Hopkins, MN 55343
• Open House: Light Rail Routing
August 13, 2009 (11:30 am - 1:00 pm)
Minneapolis Central Library
300 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, MN 55401
• Open House: Light Rail Routing & Station Area Plans
August 13, 2009 (6:30 pm - 8:00 pm)
Marriott Southwest Hotel
5801 Opus Parkway Minnetonka, MN 55343
• Open House: Light Rail Routing & Station Area Plans
August 18, 2009 (6:30 pm - 8:00 pm)
St. Louis Park City Hall
5005 Minnetonka Blvd. St. Louis Park, MN 55416
• Open House: Light Rail Routing & Station Area Plans
August 19, 2009 (6:30 pm - 8:00 pm)
Eden Prairie City Hall
8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 9
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 10
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 11
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 12
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 13
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 14
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 15
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 16
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 4)
Subject: Update on Southwest Transit and Freight Rail Study Page 17
Meeting Date: July 13, 2009
Agenda Item #: 5
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Minnehaha Creek Partnership.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
No formal action requested. Staff desires to discuss the concept of participating in a partnership
with other communities and agencies relating to Minnehaha Creek.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Does the City Council wish to adopt a resolution indicating its desire to participate in a partnership
intended to preserve and enhance the resources of Minnehaha Creek?
BACKGROUND:
After the canoe ride down the Minnehaha Creek in June, 2008, the City Council convened in a
study session and discussed with representatives of the City Minnetonka, Three Rivers Park District
and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District various matters associated with Minnehaha Creek (see
attached except from June 23, 2008 City Council Study Session Minutes). During this discussion it
was noted that the City of Minnetonka, Three Rivers Park District and the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District had developed a partnership to coordinate efforts for the betterment of the creek.
It was suggested that this partnership concept could be expanded to include other communities
adjacent to the creek.
Since this study session the city managers and staff from Minnetonka, Hopkins, St. Louis Park and
Edina, along with representative from Three Rivers, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the
Minneapolis Park Board, have met several times to examine ways to further this partnership. From
these meetings it was determined that to meet the varying interests of the organizations at the table,
starting with a simple commitment to participate via the adoption of a resolution was the best
approach to use.
Attached is a resolution drafted by the parties involved that authorizes the various entities to
participate in the Minnehaha Creek Partnership. As you will see in the resolution, the intent of the
partnership is –
“A partnership of local and regional leaders, recognizing that Minnehaha Creek is a significant
regional recreational and natural resource, commits to preserving and enhancing the creek’s resources
for current and future generations while strengthening the communities along the creek.”
As further noted in the resolution, the goals of the partnership would be to –
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 2
Subject: Minnehaha Creek Partnership
1. Promote the public recreational use, where appropriate, of Minnehaha Creek by providing
opportunities for citizens to use and enjoy the creek resources with the intent of increasing
the livability and quality of life within the watershed.
2. Preserve, protect and enhance the area’s cultural resources through greater public
understanding of the significant role Minnehaha Creek has played in American history and
culture.
3. Enhance understanding and appreciation of Minnehaha Creek through expanded education
and interpretive opportunities.
4. Communicate with partners to coordinate land use and infrastructure decisions that are
consistent with the partnership’s goals.
5. Work with partners to identify minimum standards for landings, bridges, roadway crossings
and other creek elements.
6. Achieve local, state and federal recognition of Minnehaha Creek as a significant regional
resource.
7. Improve the Minnehaha Creek ecosystem by minimizing direct discharges, achieving desired
in-stream flows that improve water quality through effective land use planning and decision
making.
8. Develop a community and organizational philosophy that values minimal impact approaches
for both citizen and public works activities within the riparian corridor.
Adoption of the resolution does not commit any of the parties involved to provide funding or
undertake activities that are deemed undesirable. However, adopting the resolution does show a
commitment and interest towards preserving and enhancing the resource the creek represents and to
work together with other cities and agencies to help make this happen.
NEXT STEPS:
If the City Council desired to participate in the partnership, staff would bring the resolution to an
upcoming Council meeting for adoption.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Adopting the resolution does not commit the City financially. However, by forming such a
partnership, opportunities may become available for funding through the new environmental
funding being generated in the state via the recent constitutional amendment.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Participating in the Minnehaha Creek Partnership is consistent with Vision St. Louis Park and the
City Council’s Strategic Direction of “St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in
environmental stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness in all areas of City
business”.
Attachments: Draft Resolution
Excerpt of Minutes from June 23, 2008 City Council Study Session
Prepared and Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 3
Subject: Minnehaha Creek Partnership
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 09-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICPATION IN A
MINNEHAHA CREEK REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP.
WHEREAS, Minnehaha Creek is a navigable stream of regional significance, providing
recreational and natural resource benefits to the Cities of Edina, Hopkins, Minneapolis, Minnetonka
and Saint Louis Park; Hennepin County; and to the greater metropolitan region; and
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park recognizes that a Minnehaha Creek Regional
Partnership (comprised of the Cities of Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and St. Louis Park, the
Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, Hennepin
County, and Three Rivers Park District), will provide opportunities to coordinate efforts to promote
the use and benefits of Minnehaha Creek and further develop the creek’s natural and recreational
resources; and
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park wishes to promote the benefits of the natural and
recreational resources of Minnehaha Creek through said Partnership.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of St. Louis Park supports creation and
participation in an informal working group known as the Minnehaha Creek Regional Partnership,
with the following vision and goals:
Minnehaha Creek Regional Partnership: Vision
“A partnership of local and regional leaders, recognizing that Minnehaha Creek is a
significant regional recreational and natural resource, commits to preserving and enhancing
the creek’s resources for current and future generations while strengthening the communities
along the creek.”
Minnehaha Creek Regional Partnership: Goals
1. Promote the public recreational use, where appropriate, of Minnehaha Creek by
providing opportunities for citizens to use and enjoy the creek resources with the intent
of increasing the livability and quality of life within the watershed.
2. Preserve, protect and enhance the area’s cultural resources through greater public
understanding of the significant role Minnehaha Creek has played in American history
and culture.
3. Enhance understanding and appreciation of Minnehaha Creek through expanded
education and interpretive opportunities.
4. Communicate with partners to coordinate land use and infrastructure decisions that are
consistent with the partnership’s goals.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 4
Subject: Minnehaha Creek Partnership
5. Work with partners to identify minimum standards for landings, bridges, roadway
crossings and other creek elements.
6. Achieve local, state and federal recognition of Minnehaha Creek as a significant regional
resource.
7. Improve the Minnehaha Creek ecosystem by minimizing direct discharges, achieving
desired in-stream flows that improve water quality through effective land use planning
and decision making.
8. Develop a community and organizational philosophy that values minimal impact
approaches for both citizen and public works activities within the riparian corridor.
THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of St. Louis Park City
Council authorizes the City’s participation in the Minnehaha Creek Regional Partnership.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council ___________, 2009
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 5
Subject: Minnehaha Creek Partnership
EXCERPT OF OFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
JUNE 23, 2008
2. City Council Canoe Trip
City Council took a canoe trip down Minnehaha Creek with the City Manager, Park and Recreation
staff, and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. Also participating were representative
from the City of Minnetonka, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and the Three Rivers Park
District.
Ms. Barone explained to the Council what the City of Minnetonka has been doing with the area
around the Minnehaha Creek within the City of Minnetonka. The City of Minnetonka has been
buying property on the Creek for the last 45 years. They have removed a number of the homes that
they have purchased. Recently they brought in the watershed district to discuss and develop concept
plans for the area around the Creek. They have also met with the neighborhoods that border the
Creek to get their feedback regarding the Creek. For the most part, the City of Minnetonka has
been funding the projects. They have now set up a shuttle, in conjunction with Three Rivers Park
District that runs along the creek for people to canoe down the Creek. They have been averaging
about 20 rentals a weekend. They will continue the shuttles until the water level of the Creek goes
down.
Ms. Barone also said that the east side will have an interpretative center. Their hope is that by
working together with other cities and organizations they may be able to get more funding. Working
together as a group does not commit anyone financially but it does say that you would like to work
together to better the environment around the Creek. They hope to also include these opportunities
in other cities along the Creek.
Mr. Gears provided background on how the partnership began. Many years ago they pitched the
idea for the water trail to the park district and there was a lot of interest but not a lot of support. He
stated he believed it was apparent that the concepts evolving in Minnetonka could take place in
other communities. They have also begun discussion with the City of Edina. Any city is welcome
to enter into the group, just by expressing their interest.
Ms. Barone noted that the Regional LRT Trail is close to Minnehaha Creek in Minnetonka and the
consultant they had hired had looked at connecting the Regional LRT Trails to the Creek.
Councilmember Paprocki asked for clarification if the water trail was a canoe trail or a walking trail.
Ms. Barone confirmed that the trail they are discussing today would be a canoe trail on the Creek,
but they are also interested in having walking trails near the Creek. She also noted that one of the
ideas they have discussed is to add more of a parkway type environment by adding trails along the
Minnehaha Creek area. They have also discussed extending this trail system from Minnehaha Creek
to the Mississippi River.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 6
Subject: Minnehaha Creek Partnership
Mr. Wyatt noted that the trail is exciting but needs to be balanced. He also asked that the Council
keep in mind that the Creek does not always have water in it and there are many natural
characteristics of the Creek. What the Watershed District is hoping to offer is support for the
wetlands, bank stabilization, and low impact development programs. He also noted that this is
similar to what the City of St Louis Park is doing at the Methodist Hospital location. There is also a
land conservation program currently in the works with Hennepin County to purchase land for
preservation purposes.
Councilmember Sanger asked that they describe the park at the Minnetonka Mills location. Ms.
Barone answered that there is a Burwell house and to the west there will be a botanical field. This
area will have mixed hard and soft surfaces. There are currently plans for a trail and boardwalks
throughout this area. This series of trails will start from the Civic Center Campus.
Mr. Miller noted that he felt that this was one of the most exciting trails, similar to the one at the
Arboretum. He felt that the presentation was very good. He noted that the Council members could
look at the concept plans on the City of Minnetonka website.
Mr. Harmening noted that St. Louis Park is known for its history of partnerships; this is one of the
things that have helped them to be successful. He suggested looking at the environment that the
Creek travels through in St. Louis Park. He has asked how the City could enhance the Creek as an
amenity in this community and what might come to mind on how they could partner together to
enhance the Creek. He asked what ideas they may have besides the canoes.
Mr. Wyatt recommended taking advantage of development opportunities to try to achieve what they
want to achieve. He also noted that wherever these opportunities arise, the Watershed District
would like to be a part of it. He noted the fact that the City owns much of the Creek bank area and
the Watershed District would be happy to work with St. Louis Park to achieve something good for
the Creeks.
Mr. Evenson said that what they are trying to suggest doesn’t necessarily mean trails along the Creek
but it means maintaining the feel and aesthetics of the Creek. He suggested more shoreline
maintenance and to identify strategic acquisitions.
Councilmember Sanger inquired about the City of Minnetonka regarding the homes that they have
been acquiring over the past 40 years and what they did to get the community involved. Mr.
Blacksted said that there has never really been a problem with the community and that they have
always had a very positive reaction in the community when they talked about the Creek.
Councilmember Paprocki noted that there are a number of homes on the Creek and asked if they
had to choose one or two problems homes on the Creek and determine how they could go about
fixing it. Mr. Evenson said that he would suggest the Knollwood area to Methodist Hospital. He
noted that it was a good area for development and for the different organizations to work together.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 7
Subject: Minnehaha Creek Partnership
Mr. Miller noted that St. Louis Park owns most of the land from Methodist Hospital back to the
Creek. He thought this would be a great opportunity to develop into these wetlands. Mr. Blacksted
said that the land around Knollwood is going to change; the challenge is having a plan for that land.
Mr. Evenson felt that if the City had the vision and an opportunity to move ahead, they could make
some real changes in this area. He also said that there is some real money available to do this. There
are many things you could do in this area including education programs, alternative to timber
building, etc.
Mr. Johnson noted that one of the things they have done in Minnetonka is to build formal launch
areas for the canoes. If they were going to extend the shuttle program they would really have to do
this in St. Louis Park. Ms. Walsh added they have upgraded the canoe area by the Target store in St.
Louis Park and it could be used as a launch area.
Mr. Gears added that the idea is to move these visions outside of Minnetonka. They would like to
include what they have started in Minnetonka with other communities, to take what is hidden away
and show it to the public. He also noted that by joining this governance there is no financial
commitment, each community has a member that sits on the steering board and then at a staff level
they get together once every two months and discuss how to get things moving. St. Louis Park
would get to be part of the team. It is a meeting meant to keep communities accountable and to
remain invested in moving forward. It is a commitment of partners.
Mr. Harmening asked if they would send him a copy of the governance agreement to review.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked for an update on the project at Methodist Hospital. Mr. Calkins
said that the current plan is to start this winter, possibly December or January. He also noted that
the site is going to be a mess because wetland projects are inherently messy. The plan is to do
wintertime construction when the land is frozen.
Discussion took place regarding the canoe shuttle service and the canoe riders. Mr. Johnson stated
that there are about 50% Minnetonka residents riding the Creek. The number one request that they
get from riders is to be able to go farther down the Creek. They have had the idea in mind to share
canoes among the cities so that they can work together to get the peopled shuttled.
Councilmember Sanger asked how much longer they would be running the shuttle service this year.
Mr. Johnson replied that they are committed through the end of July but it all depends on the water
levels.
Mr. Harmening asked what the cost is to use the canoe shuttle service. Mr. Johnson replied that it is
a 2.4 mile-canoe trip and that the cost is $20 to rent a canoe and $20 per group to use the shuttle
service.
Mr. Harmening also asked if the riders sign a release form. Mr. Johnson noted that the City of
Minnetonka has used the Three Rivers Park District release form.
Meeting of July 13, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 8
Subject: Minnehaha Creek Partnership
Mr. Gears noted that there are 6 or 7 points on the Creek that you can start and get out of the
canoe. Ideally he would like to see a shuttle service that could run between all of these points.
Mr. Evenson ended the meeting by inviting whoever would like to help with the Creek cleanup on
July 13th was more than welcome to join. The cleanup is being sponsored by Linenkugel’s and REI.
They will start in the late afternoon and finish with a barbeque.
Meeting Date: July 13, 2009
Agenda Item #: 6
Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance
Presentation Other:
EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other:
Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other:
TITLE:
Communications (Verbal).
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Not Applicable.
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
BACKGROUND:
At every Study Session, verbal communications will take place between staff and Council for the
purpose of information sharing.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION:
Not Applicable.
Attachments: None
Prepared and Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager