Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/11/09 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA NOVEMBER 9, 2009 Mayor Jacobs Absent 6:20 p.m. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 3a. Canvass Results of the Municipal General Election held on November 3, 2009 Recommended Action: Motion to Approve the Resolution Declaring Results of the Municipal General Election held November 3, 2009. 4. Adjournment 6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION – Council Chambers Discussion Items 1. 6:30 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – November 23, 2009 2. 6:35 p.m. City Manager’s 2009 Performance Evaluation (with Consultant) 3. 7:00 p.m. Future Planning Studies 4. 7:30 p.m. Transportation Policies for 2030 Comprehensive Plan 5. 8:00 p.m. Fire Stations Project Update 6. 8:30 p.m. Proposed Amendments to Business Licensing, Chapter 8 and Environmental and Public Health Chapter 12 of the City Code 7. 9:00 p.m. Communications (Verbal) Written Reports 8. Telecommunications Commission State Legislative Update 9:10 p.m. Adjourn St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV cable channel 17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of City Hall and on the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website. Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Meeting Date: November 9, 2009 Agenda Item #: 3a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: Special Meeting EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Canvass Results of the Municipal General Election held on November 3, 2009. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve the Resolution Declaring Results of the Municipal General Election held November 3, 2009. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable BACKGROUND: City Charter Section 4.08 requires the City Council to meet and canvass election returns within seven (7) days of any regular or special election and declare the results as soon as possible. As required by Charter, the Resolution includes: • Total number of good ballots cast • Total number of spoiled or defective ballots • The vote for each candidate with a declaration of those who were elected • A true copy of the ballots used • The names of the judges and clerks of election • Such other information as may seem pertinent FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Election expenses are included in the adopted 2009 budget. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable Attachments: Resolution Results of Elections Write In Tally Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 09-_____ RESOLUTION CANVASSING ELECTION RETURNS OF ST. LOUIS PARK - NOVEMBER 3, 2009 MUNICIPAL GENERAL ELECTION WHEREAS, pursuant to City Charter Section 4.08, the City Council shall meet and canvass election returns within seven days of any election and shall declare the results as soon as possible; and WHEREAS, the results prepared and certified to by the election judges have been presented in summary form to the City Council for inspection, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council as follows: 1. The November 3, 2009 election returns having been canvassed, the votes received by each candidate for city offices are as follows: CITY OFFICES Councilmember Ward 1 Total Votes % of Vote Sue Sanger 570 94.4% Write-ins 34 5.6% TOTAL 604 100.0%% Councilmember Ward 2 Anne Mavity 717 59.4% Claudia Johnson Madison 486 40.3% Write-ins 4 0.3% TOTAL 1,207 100.0% Councilmember Ward 3 Sue Santa 414 92.0% Write-ins 36 8.0% TOTAL 450 100.0% Councilmember Ward 4 Julia Ross 427 56.0% Bill Theobald 330 43.3% Write-ins 5 0.7% TOTAL 762 100.0% Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 3 2. The number of spoiled ballots, the number of persons registered prior to the election and on Election Day, the number of voter receipts, the number of absentee ballots, and the total number of good votes cast in the city are as follows: SPOILED BALLOTS 32 REGISTERED AT 7 A.M. 30,768 REGISTERED AT THE POLLS 99 TOTAL REGISTERED VOTERS 30,867 VOTER RECEIPTS 3,057 ABSENTEE BALLOTS 160 TOTAL VOTERS 3,217 (Percent Voting) 10% 3. The Clerk and Judges of the election were as follows: Nancy J. Stroth, City Clerk Kris Luedke, Election Official Lisa Songle, Election Official Tim Jones, Election Technician 1-1, Benilde/St. Margaret’s Enz Mary Chair Martens Brenda Co-Chair Braunstein Farrel Dosal Frank Fischels Angela Manuel Julie 1-2, Peter Hobart Primary Center Hintz Todd Chair Allen Bill Marek Margaret Nerheim Constance Oberg Laura 1-3, Peter Hobart Primary Center Drache Kay Chair Bloom Jan Co-Chair Bratland Rose Kurtz J. Hamilton Murman Jeffrey Tuberman Marcia 1-4, Central Community LaPray Jami Chair Malcomson Nanette Co-Chair Bagloo Ira Blomquist Nan Connell Melissa 1-5, City Hall - Community Room Ruhl Barbara Chair Maynard Mary Co-Chair Kurtz Kirsten Smith Esther Stapleton Kris Thornsjo Lucille 2-6, City Hall Council Chambers Brehmer David Chair Gormley Maureen Co-Chair Barbo Barbara Kohler Carol Lynch Tom Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 4 2-7, SLP Rec Center Plumeri Margaret Chair Wuebker Debra Co-Chair Bagne Amy Cochran Susan Kay Evers Carol Schemel Lyla Stehly Kathy 2-8, Susan Lindgren Intermediate Center Bloom Jon Chair Botner Loren Co-Chair Hanley Sheila Johnson Mary Monson Pat Stevenson Leah Thorne Richard 2-9, Aldersgate United Methodist Church Larson David Chair Bjorgaard Deb Co-Chair Adams Margaret Krause Marguerite Marske Ava St. Lawrence Annette 3-10, Prince of Peace Lutheran Church Tape William Chair Rainey William Co-Chair Deane Betty Hill Bernice Kleinman Jan Nelson Kelley 3-11, SLP Senior High School Serrell Judith Chair Benson Janet Co-Chair Hamilton Sylvia Posz Nalezny Lois Schmit Francis 3-12, Lenox Community Center Otterblad Patricia Chair Scully MaryJo Co-chair Gormley Tim Meyers Sally Ruth Roger 3-13, Aquila Primary Center Williams Michael Chair Huiras Ken Co-Chair Kertes Anne Metzker Kathy Watson William 4-14, Westwood Lutheran Church Slager Eunice Chair Burggraff Kate Co-Chair Gerhardson Joan Larson Sharon Lee Joan Tanick Paul 4-15, Peace Presbyterian Church Hendix Mary Chair Gardner Peter Co-Chair Bergquist Rogene Kalk Todd Kulas Carla Stanchfield Sherm 4-16, SLP Junior High School Christensen Mary Lou Chair Plovnick Ross Co-Chair Conery Mary Kaye Maisel Paula McKay Richard Palm Patricia Rose Fred 4-17, Eliot Community Center Koepcke Stephen Chair Steege Richard Co-Chair Bahner Kristin George Michael Kremer Patricia Petermeieer Josie Absentee Ballot Board Judges Danovsky Melonie Huiras Shirley Jacobs Josephine Ploof Patricia Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 5 4. True copies of the ballots are attached. NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the following candidates have been elected to four (4) year terms commencing on the first (lst) regularly scheduled meeting of 2010: Councilmember Ward 1 - Sue Sanger Councilmember Ward 2 - Anne Mavity Councilmember Ward 3 - Sue Santa Councilmember Ward 4 - Julia Ross Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 9, 2009 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 6 TRUE COPY OF WARD 1 PRECINCT 1 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 7 TRUE COPY OF WARD 1 PRECINCT 2 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 8 TRUE COPY OF WARD 1 PRECINCT 3 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 9 TRUE COPY OF WARD 1 PRECINCT 4 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 10 TRUE COPY OF WARD 1 PRECINCT 5 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 11 TRUE COPY OF WARD 2 PRECINCT 6 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 12 TRUE COPY OF WARD 2 PRECINCT 7 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 13 TRUE COPY OF WARD 2 PRECINCT 8 (ISD NO.273) BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 14 TRUE COPY OF WARD 2 PRECINCT 8 (ISD NO. 283) BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 15 TRUE COPY OF WARD 2 PRECINCT 8 (ISD NO. 283 Edina Residents ONLY) BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 16 TRUE COPY OF WARD 2 PRECINCT 9 (ISD NO. 270) BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 17 TRUE COPY OF WARD 2 PRECINCT 9 (ISD NO. 283) BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 18 TRUE COPY OF WARD 3 PRECINCT 10 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 19 TRUE COPY OF WARD 3 PRECINCT 11 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 20 TRUE COPY OF WARD 3 PRECINCT 12 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 21 TRUE COPY OF WARD 3 PRECINCT 13 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 22 TRUE COPY OF WARD 4 PRECINCT 14 (ISD NO. 270) BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 23 TRUE COPY OF WARD 4 PRECINCT 14 (ISD NO. 283) BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 24 TRUE COPY OF WARD 4 PRECINCT 15 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 25 TRUE COPY OF WARD 4 PRECINCT 16 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 26 TRUE COPY OF WARD 4 PRECINCT 17 BALLOT Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 27 Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 28 Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3a) Page 29 CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 3, 2009 GENERAL ELECTION WRITE-IN RESULTS WARD 1 WARD 2 WARD 3 WARD 4 Abelson, Sharon 1 Basil, John 1 Anyone Else 3 Cermark, Grant 1 Albright, Thor 1 Hilgart, Josh 1 Babatz, Dave 1 Garrison, Robert 1 Anyone Else 4 Malkerson, Sherm 1 Claus, Chris 1 Leavitt, Alfred 1 Bartl, Kit 1 Podein, Sherry 1 Cox, Colin 3 Rubenstein, Adam 1 Busman, Taxi 1 Dessuosges, Dave 1 Swerdlick, Paul 1 Champangne, Roger 2 Donovan, William III 1 Johnson, Dan 1 Evers, Pat 1 Kaplan, Steve 1 Florey, Matt 1 Lambert, Harold Sr. 1 Hamilton, Sylvia 1 Lima, Anna 1 Held, Mike 2 Lower Taxes 1 Herkenhoff, Thomas R 1 Martz, Melanie 1 Hillman, Laura 1 Mavity, Anne 2 Howsa, John 1 Murray, George 3 Kenzie, Bill 1 No Name (Blank) 5 Kirby, J 1 Rubin, Howard 1 Lindborg, Dennis L 1 Runge, Peter 1 Mavity, Sandra 1 Schlegel, Theresa 2 Mavity, Anne 2 Simpson, Homer 1 Meyer, Brad 1 Smith, Dov 1 Morris, Mike 1 Snoopy 1 Nelson, Kelly 1 Strohl, Erica 1 No name 1 Wilson, Dennis 1 Paprocki, Loran 1 Poprockski 1 Rainey, William 1 Rudolph 1 Sauter, Matthew 1 Weiner, Stephen 1 Wilkrscheidt, Anton 1 Meeting Date: November 9, 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 – November 23, 2009. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for the study session on Monday, November 23, 2009. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agenda as proposed? BACKGROUND: At each study session, approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the tentative agenda and proposed discussion items for the study session on November 23, 2009. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: None. Attachment: Future Study Session Agenda Planning for November 23, 2009 Prepared by: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Future Study Session Agenda Planning Tentative Discussion Items Study Session, Monday, November 23, 2009 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes) 2. Highway 100 and Utica Avenue Frontage Road Improvements – Public Works (45 minutes). Mn/DOT staff will discuss the TH 100 project and Utica Avenue Frontage Road improvements. 3. Green Building Policy – Community Development (30 minutes) Staff is returning to the Council to discuss a draft green building policy for encouraging sustainable development in St. Louis Park. Does the Council wish staff to pursue developing a green building policy for the city? Does the Council wish to link financial incentives to development projects that encourage green building practices? 4. Budget 2010 – Finance (45 minutes) The City Manager will continue discussions with the Council about the proposed 2010 budget. 5. Turf – High School Football Field – Parks & Recreation/Admin. Services (15 minutes) At the Study Session on October 26 the City Council asked that this matter be placed on a future agenda for discussion prior to the end of the year. This discussion would be a follow- up to the discussion which occurred between the School Board and City Council on October 19. 6. 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 October 2009 Monthly Financial Statement - Finance End of Meeting: 9:00 p.m. Meeting Date: November 9, 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: City Manager’s 2009 Performance Evaluation. RECOMMENDED ACTION: City Council to meet with consultant J. Forrest to finalize process for the City Manager’s 2009 performance evaluation. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None. BACKGROUND: Council has chosen consultant J. Forrest to facilitate the City Manager’s performance evaluation for 2009. Mr. Forrest will be in attendance to introduce himself to the Council and describe the recommended process for the evaluation. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Consultant costs would be applied to the Human Resources budget. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachment: Evaluation Form Prepared by: Ali Fosse, HR Coordinator Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: November 9, 2009 (Item No. 2) Page 2 City of St. Louis Park 2009 CITY MANAGER APPRAISAL FORM CHECK ONE BOX FOR EACH CATEGORY PROVIDE COMMENTS FOR EACH CATEGORY IN THIS COLUMN Organizational Management & Leadership Exceeds Expectations Successful Meets Expectations Needs Improvement Don’t Know Communication Skills and Public Relations Exceeds Expectations Successful Meets Expectations Needs Improvement Don’t Know Relationship with the City Council Exceeds Expectations Successful Meets Expectations Needs Improvement Don’t Know Interagency Relations Exceeds Expectations Successful Meets Expectations Needs Improvement Don’t Know Long Range Planning Exceeds Expectations Successful Meets Expectations Needs Improvement Don’t Know Meeting Date: November 9, 2009 (Item No. 2) Page 3 CHECK ONE BOX FOR EACH CATEGORY PROVIDE COMMENTS FOR EACH CATEGORY IN THIS COLUMN Staff Supervision/Overall Performance of City Staff Exceeds Expectations Successful Meets Expectations Needs Improvement Don’t Know Fiscal/Business Management Exceeds Expectations Successful Meets Expectations Needs Improvement Don’t Know OTHER COMMENTS: ___________________________________________________________ Signature Date Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Future Planning Studies. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff desires to discuss with the City Council proposed areas in the community recommended by the Comprehensive Plan for further study. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the priorities recommended? BACKGROUND: The Comprehensive Plan identifies a number of areas in the city that deserve future study. The attached map shows these areas and following is a description of them. A. Southwest LRT Station Area Planning Over the last year and one half Staff has worked on a Hennepin County funded Station Area Planning Study. This initial plan is just completed and a number of items from it are being incorporated in the Comprehensive Plan update. The next step is to work with Hennepin County to have the line and station areas designated as a County “Community Works” project. This will allow continued planning with the communities along the LRT line, and provide for the potential for funding infrastructure improvements. Areas needing future study in St. Louis Park include looking closely at the circulation and access and development/market opportunities. Staff will continue to work on these areas continuously over the next two or more years. The City will continue to be involved with the parallel SWLRT planning process in the next several years as well. Hennepin County will finalize the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) process, and then the project will be turned over to the Metropolitan Council and the Preliminary Engineering (PE) phase will begin. It is expected there will be staff groups to work on details of the route and station area planning at this level also. B. Commercial Nodes and Corridors Several areas have been identified for study as shown on the attached map in yellow. The intent of looking at these areas more closely is to plan for the appropriate type and amount of commercial development and to determine what the city can do to help the private market succeed. For each of these areas, a study would include analysis of the land use, market conditions, circulations, density, parking and neighborhood interface, among other items. The areas as prioritized are shown on the map: Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3) Page 2 B-1 Lake Street area - Louisiana to Wooddale Avenue B-2 Louisiana and Cedar Lake Road (south the 28th) B-3 Minnetonka Boulevard and Texas, Louisiana, Dakota, Lake and Hwy 25 B-4 Wayzata Boulevard south or I-394; Excelsior Boulevard east of Quentin; Excelsior Boulevard west of Hwy 100 An initial step to get the process started would be to have a market analysis completed for these sites/areas to determine the long range potential for commercial development. C. Transportation Corridor Studies A long range analysis of projected traffic studies shows the corridors that may have capacity problems in the future (see attached SRF map). SRF consulting provided us with information showing which from the 2030 analysis should have priority. C-1 Canadian Pacific rail corridor – Parallel to the SW LRT planning, Hennepin County is considering rerouting Twin Cities and Western (TC&W) freight rail to the north-south Canadian Pacific (CP) rail line. If traffic is moved to this line, the route (tracks and bridges) will likely have to be rebuilt and/or reconfigured. This will have significant community impacts for circulation. In addition, Three Rivers Park District recently completed a Regional Trail Feasibility Study that looked at the possibility of a trail along or in the CP corridor. A north-south trail is desirable as it would connect several other regional trails and provide much more opportunity for movement among between Golden Valley, St. Louis Park, Edina and Bloomington. A trail in the CP rail corridor is identified on the Metropolitan Council’s regional Parks System Plan map. Mitigation measures for moving the freight route could potentially result in a wider right-of-way along the CP line. In additional to a north-south trail, the city should consider studying a possible north-south roadway connection in this right-of-way to help alleviate bottlenecks in the community. C-2 Louisiana and Cedar Lake Road - In addition to these roadways needing some future analysis based on projected capacities, the commercial areas at the intersection and in the vicinity, along with the rebuilding of the Fire Station and Northside Park point toward a combined area-wide study. This study would consider the future for commercial properties, intensity of commercial redevelopment and traffic and roadway circulation needs. C-3 Minnetonka Boulevard east of Hwy 100 The western portion of Minnetonka Boulevard was the subject of the Minnetonka Boulevard Design Plan this past year. Council Member Sanger requested the east portion also be looked at in terms of a “complete” street – looking at pedestrian, bicycle and bus connections in addition to roadway needs. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3) Page 3 Study Priorities Staff recommends priorities in the following order and as shown on the attached chart: A. Station Areas – 2009 – on Needs: Continued staff time Community Works funding Traffic consultant B. Commercial Nodes and Corridors 1. Lake Street Area – Louisiana to Wooddale Avenue 2. Louisiana and Cedar Lake Road – Overall area and roadway study (combined with C-2) 3. Minnetonka Boulevard nodes 4. Corridors – Wayzata and Excelsior Blvds. C. Transportation Corridors 1. C-2 CP Rail corridor 2. C-3 Minnetonka Boulevard Planning Studies – Draft Timeframe 2009 2010 2011 2012+ Comp Plan Land use changes Plan by Neighborhood – Phase II A. Station Area Planning B. Commercial nodes and corridors Lake Street Louisiana/Cedar Lake Road Group of small nodes along Minnetonka at Louisiana, Dakota, Lake and Hwy 25 Wayzata Blvd; Excelsior Blvd neighborhood commercial C. Roadway corridor plans CP Rail corridor Minnetonka Boulevard D. Other Fire Stations SW LRT Bicycle and Pedestrian Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3) Page 4 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Consulting expertise in traffic, market and urban design areas will be needed for some of the studies. The Station Area Planning group is pursuing funding for studies and infrastructure through County Community Works. It is expected some consulting would be funded from the Development Fund. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Attachments: Planning Study Areas Map SRF Threshold Analysis Map Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Planning Study Areas Transportation Modifications Roadway Study Areas SW LRT Station Planning Areas Comprehensive Plan Update C-2 C-1 C-3 A A A B-4 B-4 B-4 B-3B-3B-3B-3B-3 B-2 B-1 Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3)Page 5 O x fo r d S tre et 32nd Street 28th Street Franklin Avenue Flag AvenueKentucky AvenueNevadaAvenueColorado AvenueZarthanAvenueTexas AvenueTexas Avenue36th Street 00096973 October 2009 Analysis Results St. Louis Park Arterial Threshold Analysis City of St. Louis Park Figure 1 LEGEND Detailed analysis currently recommendedNORTHNorth H:\Projects\6973\TS\Fig01_Analysis Results.pdfDetailed analysis recommended 2020-2025 Detailed analysis is not recommended Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 3)Page 6 Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Transportation Policies for 2030 Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council is asked to provide feedback to staff on the transportation policies proposed to be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council wish to adopt the transportation policies as written in the Comprehensive Plan? BACKGROUND: Attached are goals and policies for: Highway and Streets, Bicycles and Pedestrians, and Transit for City Council review. These goals and policies have been developed since the Comprehensive Plan was originally drafted and sent out in May, 2009. “Connecting Our Community” has been a theme in St. Louis Park, as witnessed in its identification as a strategic direction from Vision. It was also a highlight of the 2008 Decision Resources Survey as well as one of the most common themes in our Comprehensive Plan Neighborhood Input process in the spring of 2009. Our Comprehensive Plan incorporates this direction and integrates it with our land use and development goals of being a “livable” community. Many background studies addressing the various connection issues have been completed or are in progress, including: Active Living Sidewalk and Trails Plan; North-South Connections; Highway 7 and Wooddale; Highway 7 and Louisiana, Park Place Boulevard/Xenia Bicycle and Pedestrian Study; Minnetonka Boulevard Design Plan, CP Trail Feasibility Study and others. What follows is a summary of the various transportation policies being recommended: Highways and Streets The goals and policies in this section are generally similar to the existing plan, with some specifics added in addressing roadway plans that are identified (e.g. Highway 7 and Wooddale), methods for improving streets (MSA streets and the Pavement Management program) and they specifically add traffic calming on neighborhood streets and the concept of “complete streets” - designed for all users. Improvements to the local system are planned via the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP), which is a five year plan for capital and infrastructure expenditures. Local improvements are prioritized based on the condition of the street infrastructure. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 2 Bicycles and Pedestrians Goals and policies in the Bicycles and Pedestrians section of the Comprehensive Plan include many of the conclusions from the Active Living Sidewalk and Trails Plan. Identified goals address safety improvements, expansions to the sidewalk and trail networks, improving the signage and way finding for users, and supporting options for transit and non-motorized transportation options. Transit Transit goals and policies surround the ideas of increasing service and making it easier for citizens to use the transit system. The city works closely with Metro Transit on providing service and changing it with major developments and/or ridership changes. Continued work on the Southwest LRT will include providing bus transit to light rail stations. Freight Rail There are not any goals and policies in relation to freight rail proposed at this time. The 1999 Freight Study discussed “minimizing impacts” of freight rail on St. Louis Park and included the desire to eliminate all blocking and switching operations in Oxford Industrial Park. Hennepin County has agreed to work cooperatively with St. Louis Park and other agencies to identify impacts, mitigation requirements and funding for options to address the potential of rerouting Twin Cities & Western (TC&W) trains in St. Louis Park. These items can be formed into goals and policies if the Council desires. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: No new financial impacts are under consideration at this time. However, the implementation of some of the policies will require consideration as to how improvements are paid and incorporation into the City’s CIP. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community: ƒ Developing an expanded and organized network of sidewalks and trails. ƒ Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and SWLRT. ƒ Evaluating and investigating additional north/south transportation options for the community. Attachments: Highways and Streets: Goals and Policies Bicycle and Pedestrians: Goals and Policies Transit: Goals and Policies Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 3 Highways and Streets: Goals and Policies Goal #1 Provide a safe, connected, and efficient community street network to accommodate existing and projected traffic needs. Policy 1-A Promote timely updates to the roadway functional classification system within St. Louis Park to maintain a balanced hierarchy of streets for distributing traffic from neighborhoods to the regional highway network. Policy 1-B Undertake transportation analysis studies of City streets and intersections that are identified as future congestion areas in 2030 to identify improvement strategy alternatives. Policy 1-C Undertake more detailed study of the theoretical additional north-south roadway connections to compare the benefits and evaluate the viability of each of the options for improving north-south roadway connectivity. Policy 1-D Promote and support the use of Travel Demand Management (TDM) strategies to achieve more efficient use of the existing community roadway network and reduce congestion problems. Policy 1-E Investigate and evaluate appropriate “traffic calming” techniques for streets within or adjacent to residential neighborhoods that are impacted by traffic congestion, excessive traffic volumes for a residential neighborhood, excessive traffic speeds, or cut-through traffic. Policy 1-F Promote and support adaptation of the community roadway network to take advantage of improved transportation technologies and modes. Goal #2 Provide well-designed and well-maintained community streets that balance the needs of all users, residents, businesses, and property owners. Policy 2-A Create a network of complete streets that are designed for all users, including drivers, public transit riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians, as well as people with differing physical abilities. Policy 2-B Utilize the City’s Pavement Management Program (PMP) to maintain the municipal streets network in a safe and fiscally responsible manner, ensuring that the average Overall Pavement Condition Index (OCI) of the street system is maintained at an acceptable level. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 4 Policy 2-C Utilize the annual Municipal State Aid Streets (MSAS) funding allocation to the City to maintain the City’s MSAS network, which includes many of the City’s arterial and collector streets, in a safe and fiscally responsible manner. Goal #3 Work with regional transportation agencies to improve the functionality and accessibility of the regional highway network within and adjacent to St. Louis Park. Policy 3-A Support Mn/DOT’s planned improvements of Trunk Highway 100 through St. Louis Park, including reconstruction of the six-lane freeway, replacement of bridges, and reconstructed interchanges at Minnetonka Boulevard and TH 7. Policy 3-B Support and participate in the redesign and reconstruction of Trunk Highway 7 intersections at Wooddale Avenue and Louisiana Avenue to grade-separated interchanges, as a means to improve the safety and efficiency of crossing TH 7 for all transportation modes. Policy 3-C Work with Hennepin County to study congested County road segments and intersections that are identified as future congestion areas in 2030. Policy 3-D Consider Mn/DOT and Hennepin County roadway access management guidelines for their roadways that are located within St. Louis Park. Policy 3-E Support implementation of Hennepin County’s Complete Streets Policy to retrofit County arterial streets within St. Louis Park into complete streets. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 5 Bicycles and Pedestrians: Goals and Policies The City of St. Louis Park is proactively making the community better place to live. Designing and operating a transportation network that assures safety and accessibility for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders is a key component of that effort. Improving the City’s bicycle and pedestrian systems will provide transportation and recreation choices that are safe, healthy, economical, environmentally friendly, and available to all people. Goal #1 Safety: Improve the safety of the bicycle and pedestrian networks. Policy 1-A Systematically review and improve bicycle and pedestrian crossings at major road intersections, highways and railroad tracks. Implementation: • Install countdown timers at all signalized intersections as new signal are installed or existing signals are routinely replaced or upgraded • Consider improvements to lighting, striping or other measures at intersections having repeated crashes involving pedestrians or bicycles. Policy 1-B Provide for the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders when designing roads and road improvements. Implementation: • Prepare and consider a Complete Streets resolution and policy. (Complete Streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. Pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and bus riders of all ages and abilities are able to safely move along and across a complete street.) Goal #2 Connectivity: Improve and expand the pedestrian and bicycle networks. Policy 2-A Establish a citywide grid-system of sidewalks every ¼-mile (see Pedestrian Plan). Implementation: • Identify funding sources for capital and operational expenses to expand and maintain the city-wide sidewalk network • Build new sidewalks that are part of the city-wide network ƒ Focus on segments serving several key destinations or key corridors as prioritized in the Active Living, Sidewalks and Trails Plan Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 6 Policy 2-B Establish a citywide grid-system of bikeways every ½-mile (see Bicycle Network Plan). Implementation: • Identify funding sources for capital and operational expenses to expand and maintain the city-wide bicycle network • Build off-road trails and on-street bikeways that are part of the city-wide bicycle network as prioritized in the Active Living, Sidewalks and Trails Plan ƒ Provide new north-south bikeways connecting to the regional trail system ƒ Improve existing east-west commuter bicycle routes (Cedar Lake Road, Minnetonka Boulevard, Regional Trails) ƒ Focus on corridors that connect several key destinations as prioritized in the Active Living, Sidewalks and Trails Plan • Work with other jurisdictions to study the feasibility and alignment of a potential regional trail from Bloomington to Hopkins along the CP Rail line Policy 2-C Close gaps in neighborhood sidewalk networks. Implementation: • Identify funding source to construct up to ½-mile of sidewalk per year to close gaps in the neighborhood sidewalk network • Build sidewalk segments that are missing within a block, or on a block that is between blocks with sidewalks ƒ Consider incentives for property owners that petition the City for sidewalk construction that close gaps in neighborhood sidewalk network (i.e. fund installation) • Require sidewalks (or off-road trails or on-street bikeways where planned and appropriate) on all new subdivisions, new streets, and road reconstruction projects Goal #3 Choices: Improve transportation and recreation choices Policy 3-A Support non-motorized transportation and transit options. Policy 3-B Support multi-modal transportation. Implementation: • Provide on-road bikeways that connect to regional trails, transit, and employment centers • Improve walking and biking connections to schools and parks • Develop park trails along Minnehaha Creek, where appropriate. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 7 Goal #4 Access: Provide accessible, convenient, attractive and easily understood bicycle and pedestrian systems Implementation: • Continue the City’s annual condition analysis and maintenance activities • Improve way finding for users: ƒ Maps ƒ Coordinated Signs (work with Three Rivers Park District, Hennepin County) • Work with St. Louis Park School District or individual schools to identify and promote preferred walk and bike routes to students and parents • Provide bicycle parking with all new commercial, multiple family residential and public facility developments and additions. • Prepare new sidewalk performance standards that address the entire sidewalk corridor from street to building. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 4) Page 8 Transit: Goals and Policies Goal #1 Support and promote transit service and facilities that maximize service to the community. Policy 1-A: Work with Metro Transit to adjust and improve transit service in St. Louis Park as land uses and transit use changes. Goal #2 Promote increased use of transit, through support of a multi-modal system including buses, light rail, local circulators, and access via sidewalk and trails. Policy 2-A: Work with employers to encourage use of such programs as Transit Pass and Ridesharing to increase transit usage. Goal #3 Provide comfortable, safe and accessible transit stops for pedestrians along transit lines including bicycle parking, benches and shelters where warranted and feasible. Policy 3-A: Develop strategies for short- and long-term funding of proposed improvements to increase pedestrian and bicycle access to transit stops. Goal #4 Support the development of light rail transit in the Southwest corridor. Policy 4-A: Continue to participate in SW LRT studies and groups, including the Policy, Technical, Citizen Advisory and other input committees. Policy 4-B: Continue planning around the SW Transit station areas to determine land use, access and circulation that facilitate transit oriented development and transit use. Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Fire Stations Project Update. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff requests City Council feedback on the approach being recommended to design and implement the reconstruction of the City’s two fire stations and Northside Park. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is the City Council comfortable with the approach being proposed? BACKGROUND: Staff is organizing to complete the planning and construction of two fire stations. . A successful fire station design process will need the participation of virtually all city departments. As both fire stations are located within or adjacent to existing parks, and include planned park improvements at Northside, well coordinated design and construction phasing will be important. In addition, a thorough process of involving community stakeholder groups will be necessary. As a result, staff has developed an organizational structure to insure that this significant project is planned, designed and implemented in a well thought out and smooth fashion. For the reasons noted above, the key vehicle for preparing the fire station design and park improvements will be a Working Group with representation from many city departments. Attached is an organization chart for your review, which includes many of the individuals identified to participate. Also, attached is an outline that begins to lay out the roles and responsibilities of each group. As noted on the organizational chart, Sean Walther, Senior Planner will be the project coordinator and facilitate the process and keep the project on track. Essential to this process will be attention to the involvement and communication with affected neighborhoods and the community in general. The City has already engaged the surrounding neighborhoods and park users regarding fire station facilities deficiencies and needs, the site selection process, and park planning. We will continue to invite their participation in the design process as we move forward. In the coming weeks, more specific plans and schedules will be prepared for community involvement. Initial tasks for the Working Group (Fire Station Project Team) to undertake include: 1) preparing request for qualifications/proposals for consultants; 2) identifying permits and approvals that will be needed; and 3) identifying additional research on the sites (expanded surveys, environmental, geotechnical, etc.). Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 2 Outside technical expertise (architect, civil engineer, etc.) will do the bulk of the actual design work. The plan is to assemble a team of consultants early in the process to help ensure better understanding and coordination among them. Most municipal capital projects entail hiring a general contractor at the end of the design process through a bidding process. It is proposed that in this case, a construction management approach be used with a construction manager being brought on board first. A construction manager focuses on representing the owner’s interests by helping to control costs and monitor quality throughout design and construction. With this approach, the City Council may need to approve several smaller contracts for various elements of the building construction rather than one large construction contract with a general contractor. Attached for your information are materials responding to a few frequently asked questions about the construction management approach. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Capital Improvements Plan estimates the costs for the fire stations at $8.5 million in 2010, $5.5 million in 2011, and Northside Park improvements at $1 million in 2011. Please note that the timing of the project and final estimated costs are subject to change based on more detailed analysis being undertaken, including soils analysis. The cost for construction management services varies depending on the level of service provided, but staff estimates it will be 2-3% of the project cost. Please note that construction management services do not represent a premium over normal project costs, as these costs are generally included in the profit and administration costs not necessarily itemized in a general contractor’s bid. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. Attachments: Fire Station Project Organization Chart DRAFT Fire Station Project Roles and Responsibilities Outline Article: When Construction Management is the Best Choice Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief Cindy Walsh, Parks and Recreation Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 3 2009-11-03 Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 4 Fire Stations Project Roles & Responsibilities Outline (DRAFT) 1. City Council a. Role – Set project goals and policies b. Responsibilities – i. approve contracts, budget, schedule, process ii. review recommendations from Staff, Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2. Directors Oversight Committee a. Who – City Manager and Fire, Parks & Recreation, Public Works, Inspections, Community Development, Finance Department Directors b. Role – Oversee the process and projects, goals and objectives, set parameters c. Responsibilities – i. select representatives to participate in consultant selection process - architect, construction manager, landscape architect, civil engineer, environmental services, etc. ii. set overall budget, time frame iii. review Working Group recommendations iv. monitor project progress and work of the working group/project manager 3. Project Manager a. Who – Senior Planner Sean Walther b. Role – lead the project team and overall responsibility for project c. Responsibilities – i. chair the Working Group ii. work with Directors Oversight Committee iii. contact/director of the “consultants” iv. communication with directors oversight committee v. leading a successful project process vi. select Working Group representatives to participate in consultant selection process Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 5 4. Working Group (Fire Stations Project Team) - a. Who – representatives from the key departments – Fire, Parks & Recreation, Public Works, Inspections, Community Development, Finance, Police b. Role – Be a resource for the Project Manager and consultants; take on specific tasks as necessary and appropriate c. Responsibilities – i. review and provide input on process, technical analysis, design work, solutions ii. identify permits and approval requirements iii. create RFQ/RFP iv. identify stakeholders v. identify key issues vi. do work as needed d. Additional notes: i. not all members would be needed for every meeting. ii. may need sub-committees on particular issues (i.e. building program) 5. Consultant Group a. Who – Construction Manager and Commissioning, Architect, Civil Engineer, Landscape Architect / Park Planner, Environmental Services, Attorney, Financial Advisor b. Role – technical advisors, site and building design, construction, project delivery, etc. c. Responsibilities – i. Site and building design ii. construction iii. project delivery iv. obtaining permits / approvals v. Refining and meeting project budget, phasing, schedule Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 6 When Construction Management is the Best Choice [excerpts] David Carr, CCM, Director of Construction Management Services and Jim Mott, Field Superintendent, Iowa Division The traditional delivery method of design-bid-build is generally regarded as delivering facilities at the lowest cost. However, the reality is that encouraging the architect and a construction expert to work together from inception can save both time and money and result in a higher quality project. The use of a Construction Manager (CM) provides greater control over the entire process while fostering proactive teamwork among all parties, resulting in the most cost-effective solution while also providing a smoother, more flexible process for the owner. Operating as an extension of the owner’s staff, a CM advocates for the owner and helps optimize the allocation of the project’s budget to the owner’s program. Construction Managers understand that owners are busy with their specific business, and do not expect them to be experts at managing a project from start to finish. Managing a project requires intimate understanding of the design and engineering process, construction budgets and scheduling, construction means and methods, as well as how to best work with trade labor and regulatory agencies. To better understand how CM works, this article will outline the different forms of the CM approach, its benefits and potential pitfalls, and the owner’s perspective. It also will help you determine which process is best for your project. CM is typically offered in one of the following three forms: 1. Agency Construction Management Under this delivery method, the CM acts as an extension of the owner’s staff and manages the work of all prime contractors who have direct contracts with the owner. An agency CM typically does not self-perform trade labor work on the project. This is the preeminent CM delivery method for public sector work. 2. Construction Management At Risk This arrangement is used most often in the private sector, and combines the responsibilities of Agency CM with financial risk for the construction cost of the project. In this case, the CM prepares a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) at some point prior to the start of work. In this delivery system the trade contractors may have direct contracts with the CM or the owner depending on the terms of the Owner/CM agreement. 3. Construction Manager as Constructor This is essentially “Agency CM” except that it provides the CM with the opportunity to submit a bid for portions of the work. If the CM is awarded the bid, then it will be allowed to perform that work under a separate contract with the owner. This method provides an advantage in schedule and quality control, but is sometimes perceived as creating a conflict of interest in instances where the CM is evaluating the performance, change order requests, or quotations for its own trade contracts. CM as Constructor is not always perceived as a separate and distinct delivery method from Agency CM, but it is contractually very different. While this form has not gained wide acceptance in the public sector, increasing numbers of owners are discovering this is a viable and effective method once the competitive aspects are understood. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 7 Benefits of CM include: • Expert advocate promoting the owner’s best interest. • Schedule monitoring, reporting and enforcement. • Team relationship between the owner, the designer, and the construction manager ensures a smoother process. • Effective Budgeting – It has been estimated that 80% of all savings take place during the design phase. The opportunity to realize these savings is greatest at the earliest part of pre- design and decreases as the project approaches the bid phase. Therefore, an experienced CM should be brought on as early as possible in the project. • A construction manager can and should be selected for their qualifications, specific expertise, and value that they bring to the project. • Because the work is broken up into smaller contracts, the limitations of bonding capacity are reduced. • Stronger sense of organized control over the project. • Warranties and guarantees are properly received, processed and followed-up. • When properly implemented, construction management is not an added cost to the project because you use either a General Contractor or a CM, not both. Potential Pitfalls of CM It is a benefit to work with a construction manager who has a general contracting background and capabilities. Owners must be careful not to secure a CM who does not have either the ability to self- perform or the relationships in place that are necessary to enforce schedule compliance. Additionally, an owner must be careful not to partner with a CM who might: • Misrepresent their cost of services by hiding staff or other reimbursables in the project general conditions or by billing staff at a rate that is very different from their true compensation. • Offer to provide services at a bargain basement fee, then understaff the project or staff it with unqualified persons. Typically these firms fail to provide substantive value to the project and add cost with no real benefit. • Increase their fees by marking up change orders. • Not break down bid categories sufficiently for the owner to realize the advantage of direct access to subcontractor bids. Owner’s Perspective In a recent CMAA/FMI Owner’s survey, clients agreed the pre-design phase was the most important phase, next to construction. Therefore, they felt more time dedicated to this phase would enable a project to go forward faster with fewer changes and a higher satisfaction rate among owners. Many owners commented that involving the construction manager during the conceptual stage decreased the risk of disputes over assumptions. Owners also determined that “effective leadership” is the number one problem, along with lack of coordination among team members. That is why it is important to hire a CM with experience, integrity and a proven track record of successful projects and strong leadership. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 5) Page 8 When is CM the Best Choice? Questions owners should ask themselves prior to selecting a delivery method: • How are we going to manage the project? • Do we have the expertise, capability and manpower to manage the project in-house? • Is the size or complexity of the project appropriate to take advantage of the benefits of CM? • Is project phasing important? Do we need phased occupancies or will the project impact occupied facilities that must remain in operation? • Can we afford to wait for the Architect/Engineer to complete all of the design before we begin any portion of the construction work, or do we need to take advantage of an early start on some of the work or some of the systems procurement? • Do we know a CM experienced in our industry who has a successful track record, and who we could approach for input? Construction Management is only one choice of delivery for owners. However, it is a rapidly- growing, effective method, combining the advantage of an experienced team’s input on cost-saving measures during pre-construction and on-site advocacy of the owner’s interests during construction with the competitive cost advantage of open bidding. Carr, David and Mott, Jim. When Construction Management is the Best Choice. Retrieved November 3, 2009 from Knutson Construction: http://www.knutsonconstruction.com/news/newsletter_articles/when_cm_is_the_best_choice Meeting Date: November 9, 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: Proposed Amendments to Business Licensing, Environmental and Public Health City Codes. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff seeks direction from Council on whether or not to proceed with ordinance development and public process for the proposed code changes. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council want to proceed with the proposed changes to the code? BACKGROUND: Chapter 8 of the City Code establishes the business and contractor licensing programs for the city. This section was completely revised to the current format during the 2002 City Code re- codification, which consolidated multiple individual licensing ordinances and simplified processes to more specifically focus the programs, and reducing staff time for administering the programs. Additions and revisions to the chapter have occurred in response to identified community needs, while maintaining a fee-for-service approach. Changes over the past few years have included adding single family homes to rental licensing and incorporation of the crime-free provisions to increase both tenant and owner responsibility. Recent trends occurring in the community have resulted in staff evaluating how licensing programs could be improved to provide better tools in maintaining mission and values. Complaints have been received by the city regarding the behavior and practices of some solicitors/peddlers. Additionally, the growth of massage therapy establishments and individuals providing massage therapy services outside of licensed establishments has resulted in several complaints. Other changes to the Code are being initiated due to conflicts with the State Plumbing Code and requirements within the new Minnesota Department of Health Delegation Agreement, which is up for review next year. Business license inspections have also been becoming more time consuming as some business owners fail to promptly respond in resolving various code violations. This behavior leads to inspectors needing to make multiple re-inspections to achieve compliance and causes inefficiency in the overall program delivery. At a recent budget discussion the City Council asked that staff bring back possible code amendments to better address this issue Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 6) Page 2 DISCUSSION: The changes proposed to programs based on code requirements in Chapter 8 Business Licensing, and Chapter 12 Environment and Public Health, are outlined below and will be discussed in detail at the study session based on license type and section. Proposed concepts are intended to help create more accountability and public safeguards. Both modifications to existing business licenses and new license category’s are under consideration. Chapter 8 Business Licenses Massage Therapy Establishment License Sec. 8-296. Staff is proposing modifications to this existing license type. All establishments performing massage therapy, whether as an independent operation or associated with a spa, salon or chiropractor office must receive an annual business license. There are requirements stated in the code to ensure general safe and sanitary conditions. Changes proposed to this section include: a) Requiring the business owner applying for the license to have an annual background check performed by the Police Department. Currently a background check is only done when the city receives an application for a new establishment. Criteria will be established in the code to specify what would be grounds for denial of a license as a result of the background check. This will require additional time and will be reviewed for the effect on the annual license fee cost. b) The establishment may only allow licensed massage therapists to perform massage within the establishment. The establishment licensee, if performing massage, would also be required to be a licensed massage therapist. c) The proposed revision would eliminate the allowance of a portable sink to be used for hand washing and necessitate a plumbed hand sink as required by the Minnesota State Plumbing Code. Massage Therapist License. – Staff is proposing the creation of a new category that would license the individual massage therapists. Conceptually, this is similar to the Mechanical Contractors license, requiring minimal competency level and general insurance to provide a minimal level of safeguard. For the massage therapist license the code would require: a) Each massage therapist would be required to be licensed, whether working within a licensed establishment or providing massage therapy outside of a licensed establishment. Examples are a therapist who provides outcall home or hotel massage therapy. b) License applicants must have successfully completed a minimum 400 hours of training for massage therapy from a credited school and provide verification as part of the application process. c) A background check completed by the Police Department will be done every year before issuing the annual license. Criteria will be proposed for the code that would be grounds for denial of a license as a result of the background check. This will require additional time and will be reviewed for the effect on the annual license fee cost. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 6) Page 3 d) A provisional license would be created to allow students at a massage therapy school, operating within the city, to perform massage on the public provided they are supervised by a licensed massage therapist within a licensed school facility. Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants License Subdivision V – Proposed revisions are extensive and intended to help prevent the problems associated with peddlers and solicitors within the city during recent years. To help facilitate the background and licensing process, this program is being transferred from Inspections to the Police Department. Applicants will be required to go to the Police Department Service Counter for application and also to receive a license. Proposed new requirements include: a) A background check completed by the Police Department will be done every year before issuing the annual license. Criteria will be proposed for the code that would be grounds for denial of a license as a result of the background check. This will require additional time and will be reviewed for the effect on the annual license fee cost. b) A photo I.D. of the applicant will be created as the license and required for the peddlers and solicitors to use. The photo ID must be visibly worn at all times in which they are located and working within the city. Multiple Re-inspection Fee for Licensed Businesses – The proposed amendment would provide for the creation of a new license fee component in Section 8-33. This concept was discussed at a recent Council budget discussion. The re-inspection fee is proposed to help cover the cost of city services that occur when multiple re-inspections of licensed property become necessary. This is often a result of management being negligent in completing timely corrections of identified code violations. Performing multiple re-inspections has become an increasing time consuming problem with some businesses. A total of 1928 business license were issued in 2009. About 30 – 40 establishments have required multiple re-inspections annually. Although raising revenue is a possible result from re-inspection fees, successful implementation of this provision would hopefully be an incentive for business owner’s to work with the inspector and make the corrections in a timely manner, thereby avoiding the use of re-inspection fees. This incentive is potentially more useful as a tool to encourage compliance than citations or penalties. Listed below are proposed requirements for multiple re-inspection fees: a) A fee would be charged when more than two re-inspections are required to achieve code compliance following a correction notice from the initial inspection. b) A multiple re-inspection fee of $130 represents on average two hours of time spent on scheduling, travel time, inspection, inspection report writing, and recordkeeping. This amount is consistent with our fee-for-service perspective to recover the cost of the services being provided. Multiple re-inspections add to overall program cost and reduce the efficiency and effectiveness of inspection programs. c) The annual license renewal procedure provides a vehicle for relatively easy collection of any outstanding fees before a license is issued for the business. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 6) Page 4 Commercial Entertainment Establishment License Subdivision II – Modifications are proposed to the existing licensing provisions. There are only few establishments currently licensed as Commercial Entertainment Establishments. These generally have high public occupancy with people of all ages. Establishments are inspected to ensure compliance with Fire Codes for exiting and other safety functions. Additionally, because of the nature of these operations, staff believes the business owners should carry general liability insurance in case of public injury. The following requirements are proposed to be added to this section: a) Licensee shall maintain current general liability insurance policy in the amount of a minimum of $100,000 for each person, $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate. Evidence of insurance would be provided with license application. Chapter 12 Environment and Public Health The Minnesota Department of Health has prepared a new delegation agreement for cities and counties performing environmental health services. In preparation to enter into the new delegation agreement early next year, the city needs to ensure our Code properly adopts the necessary MN Statutes and Rules for Food, Pools, and Lodging as specified in the agreement. These requirements are already utilized during inspections; local adoption will only place them within our Code as referenced documents. These statues and rules are: a) MN Statues Chapter 157 and 327 and MN Rules Chapter 4626 for Food, Beverage, Lodging and Food Manager Certification b) MN Statues Section 144.71 through 144.74 and MN Rules 4717.0150 through 4717.3970 for Public Pools. Next Steps Staff has verbally reviewed the concept changes with the City Attorney and understands that they are within the scope of the city’s licensing authority. If the Council wishes to proceed with these proposed changes, staff will work on developing the ordinance with the City Attorney, setup up informational meetings with establishment owners, and return to Council for ordinance adoption. A target adoption date of March 1, 2010 allows staff time to implement after the busy annual license renewal period. Police and Inspection staff will be in attendance at the study session. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: None Prepared by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: November 9, 2009 Agenda Item #: 7 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Communications (Verbal). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Not Applicable. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. BACKGROUND: At every Study Session, verbal communications will take place between staff and Council for the purpose of information sharing. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. Attachments: None Prepared and Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting Date: November 9, 2009 Agenda Item #: 8 Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Telecommunications Advisory Commission State Legislative Update. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: No action needed. This report is being provided for information sharing purposes at this time. However, the issues brought up in this report should be discussed during the City Councils annual meeting with St. Louis Park’s legislators in the coming months. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Would statewide video franchising benefit or harm St. Louis Park? BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to update the City Council on proposed state legislation that could negatively impact St. Louis Park and other communities that provide local cable television programming. On the last day of the 2009 Legislative session, Representative Sheldon Johnson (DFL) District 67B (St. Paul) introduced H.F. 2396, described as “Cable communication system regulation amended, and state-authorized video service provider regulation provided.” The bill proposes that the State Public Utilities Commission begin certifying state-authorized video service providers effective January 1, 2016. Representative Johnson is the Chair of the House Telecommunications and Infrastructure Committee, which is expected to hear the bill in the next session, and if it passes, will move to the House Commerce and Labor Committee, which includes Representative Steve Simon. There is no Senate version yet. Statewide video franchising has passed in a number of states with promises to bring in new competitors, lower rates and improve services for residents. Evidence to the contrary is piling up, including a University of Minnesota study released in the spring of 2009 that studied statewide franchising in California, Michigan and Texas. The report concluded: • The number of new entrants to offer video services was underwhelming • Incumbent providers are the most active users of the new laws • Unclear whether a connection exists between new entrants and the statewide video franchising legislation. Meeting of November 9, 2009 (Item No. 8) Page 2 The best comparison for Minnesota is Iowa, which passed a statewide video franchising law 2 years ago and also has Qwest as the incumbent telephone provider. There have been no new providers, and existing providers are using the state law to evade existing franchise obligations. Qwest has signed a five-year agreement with DirecTV as their video service partner in bundled price programs, so Qwest is not building new systems to offer video the way Verizon and AT&T are in other regions of the United States. DirecTV is already available in St. Louis Park. The Minnesota Association of Community Telecommunications Advisors (MACTA) opposes H.F. 2396 as proposed. The Telecommunications Advisory Commission (TAC) believes it would harm St. Louis Park and other communities that provide local cable television programming, and voted 5- 0 at their August 13, 2009 meeting to oppose it, notify Council and recommend opposition by St. Louis Park’s state legislative delegation. A Sample of Problems with the Bill: There are no build-out criteria in the bill, so a new video service provider can build anywhere they choose, possibly bypassing areas in St. Louis Park. The new provider is allowed to offset all fees paid to municipalities, which means ROW, permit or inspection fees may be deducted from franchise fees that could be paid to St. Louis Park. The burden would be on the City of St. Louis Park to provide video signals for our cable channels to the new provider, an unknown expense that could be significant. Because of vague details in the bill, there are other possibly harmful outcomes, including cost impacts for customers and for the City of St. Louis Park, if the bill passes in the current form. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None at this time; however, passage of the bill as proposed could lower franchise fee revenues and increase costs. VISION CONSIDERATION: This report supports the strategic direction – St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Prepared by: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator Reviewed by: Jamie Zwilling, Communications Coordinator Through: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager