Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008/07/07 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA JULY 7, 2008 6:15 p.m. CLOSED DOOR/EXECUTIVE SESSION to discuss with the City Attorney pending/ongoing litigation with Nicolas Slade - Westwood Room 6:45 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Westwood Room DISCUSSION ITEM 1. Vision Strategic Directions Update - Promoting Regional Transportation Issues 2. Grant Evaluation and Ranking System (GEARS) Committee 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers 1. Call to Order 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 2a. CenterPoint Energy Grant 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Study Session Minutes June 9, 2008 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the agenda as presented and to approve items on the consent calendar. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, motion to move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion and to approve those items remaining on the consent calendar.) 5. Boards and Commissions – None 6. Public Hearings -- None 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public Meeting of July 7, 2008 City Council Agenda 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. Planned Unit Development Wooddale Pointe Recommended Action: Motion to adopt two resolutions: approving a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD to allow a five story mixed use building with commercial uses on the ground floor and senior residential on the upper floors with conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission and Staff. 8b. 1st Reading Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Recommended Action: Adopt 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments 8c. Republican National Convention Joint Powers Agreement Recommended Action: Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the Joint Powers Agreement regarding Public Safety related to the 2008 Republican National Convention. 8d. Project Report: Traffic Signals Project Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting this report, establishing and ordering Improvement Project No. 2009-2000 and Project No. 2009-2001, approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids. 9. Communication 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 of July 7, 2008 City Council Agenda 4. CONSENT CALENDAR 4a. Designate Pearson Bros. Inc the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of contract with the firm in the amount of $ $286,572.60 for Street Maintenance Project (Sealcoat Streets - Area 8) – Project No. 2008-0001 4b. Approve Resolution establishing a special assessment for the repair of the water service line at 3053 Georgia Avenue South. 4c. Adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $7,000.00 for water reservoir exterior rehabilitation located at 2936 Idaho Avenue, Project No. 2006-2300 with Champion Coatings, Inc., City Contract No. 16-07 4d. Adopt Resolution Accepting the Project Report, Establishing Improvement Project No. 2008-2700, Approving Plans and Specifications, and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Improvement Project No 2008-2700 4e. Motion to approve out-of-state travel for Mayor Jacobs to Washington D.C. from June 10- 13, 2008. 4f. Motion to approve a one year extension for the filing of the final plat titled “Fretham 9th Addition.” 4g. Approve Resolution consenting to participation of Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority with the Wayside Jersey Avenue Supportive Housing Stabilization Project. 4h. Motion to approve a resolution certifying the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) prepared for the Minnehaha Creek Restoration – Methodist Hospital dated January 25, 2007 as an adequate examination of the environmental impacts of the proposed development and accepting the Record of Decision, including Response to Comments, Findings of Fact and Conclusion declaring no need for an Environmental Impact Statement. 4i Approve Resolution authorizing the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing and establishing the date for a public hearing regarding the issuance of revenue obligations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the “Housing Program Act”) and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 to 469.1651 (the “Industrial Development Act”) in order to finance the cost of a project described below to be undertaken by Community Involvement Programs. 4j. Approve for filing Planning Commission Minutes of June 4, 2008 4k. Approve for filing Vendor Claims 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. AGENDA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:45 P.M. JULY 7, 2008 Mayor Jeff Jacobs and Councilmember C. Paul Carver Sanger Absent Westwood Room 6:15 p.m. Closed Door/Executive Session to discuss with the City Attorney pending/ongoing litigation with Nicolas Slade Discussion Items 1. 6:45 p.m. Vision Strategic Direction Discussion – Promoting Regional Transportation and related dedicated funding sources 2. 7:15 p.m. Grant Evaluation and Ranking System (GEARS) Committee 7:20 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 7, 2008 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: Vision Strategic Direction discussion. Focus area: • Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and SWLRT. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff requests that Council provide feedback on current transportation-related activities, including the continued use of lobbyists to seek state and federal funding. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Should staff continue to work with lobbyists and elected officials to secure funding for transportation projects such as TH100, TH 7 & Wooddale Ave. and TH 7 & Louisiana Ave.? Does the work in this vision action area meet Council’s expectations? BACKGROUND: On March 19, 2007, the Council adopted the Vision Strategic Directions – 18 month guide. Since adoption of the 18 month guide, Vision team members have been working on the focus areas in the strategic directions. As discussed at the Council work session in February, staff will present information for Council consideration on each Vision focus area now through September 2008. The following will be discussed: St Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Focus area: • Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and SWLRT. In the past 18 months, staff’s has worked to 1) educate elected officials about St. Louis Park’s transportation needs, 2) identify and seek federal and state funding opportunities and, 3) keep projects on schedule so that they can be built when monies become available. Staff has attached is detailed list of the transportation related activities from April 1, 2007 to present, and has listed below transportation project priorities. ƒ Glencoe Railroad Mitigation Project ƒ Southwest LRT ƒ TH 7 & Wooddale Avenue Grade Separated Interchange ƒ TH 7 & Louisiana Avenue Grade Separated Interchange Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Subject: Vision Update – Promoting Regional Transportation Issues and Related Dedicated Funding Sources ƒ TH 100 Full Build Project ƒ I-394 & TH100 C/D Collector Distributor Roads FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The city has contracts with Franzen & Associates and Lockridge Grindal Nauen to assist the city with its legislative activities. The city pays $24,000 to Franzen & Associates for state legislative work and $36,000 to Lockridge et. al. for federal relations. There will be some travel in Washington D.C. expected in 2009 to help keep project request on track ($3,000). These funds have been requested for Council’s consideration as a part of the 2009 budget materials. Staff does not expect fees to increase for 2009. VISION CONSIDERATION: This is about the Vision Strategic Direction: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. And the focus area: • Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and SWLRT. Attachments: Listing of Transportation Related Activities Prepared by: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 1) Page 3 Subject: Vision Update – Promoting Regional Transportation Issues and Related Dedicated Funding Sources Listing of Transportation Related Activities ƒ Legislature passed a comprehensive transportation funding package in 2008, which was strongly supported and championed by Senator Ron Latz, Representative Steve Simon and Representative Ryan Winkler. ƒ Mayor Jeff Jacobs has made several contacts via phone and in-person with state and federal officials to outline the need for transportation funding in St. Louis Park. His efforts have resulted in strong support from both state and federal elected officials, which may increase the city’s chances for securing funding when Congress reauthorized its’ six-year transportation bill (SAFTE-LU) in 2009. ƒ Glencoe officials have made two trips to Washington D.C., seeking funding for the Glencoe Railroad Mitigation Project. Their efforts have resulted in support from Representative Collin Peterson, who is working with Congressman Ellison to secure the remaining dollars for this project. Senators Coleman and Klobuchar are also supporters of this project. ƒ City staff submitted FY2008 & FY2009 requests for federal funding to Senators Klobuchar and Coleman, and Congressmen Ellison and Peterson for transportation projects. Preliminary conversations with our Minnesota delegation indicate strong support for all projects. City staff should know by end of July the status of these requests. ƒ Public Works successfully secured $7.0 million in STP funding from the Metropolitan Council’s Transportation Advisory Board for the reconstruction of the grade separated interchange at TH 7 & Louisiana Ave. in 2007. ƒ State and federal elected officials participated in two separate bus tours of key transportation sites in July and December of 2007. ƒ St. Louis Park and Golden Valley are working together to find solutions to the traffic congestions on TH 100 & I-394, and submitted a joint request for federal funding for FY2009. ƒ City staff met with MnDOT officials earlier this spring to discuss transportation needs and concerns about TH 7 & Wooddale Ave. MnDOT has tentatively committed to providing $1 million to the TH 7 & Wooddale Ave. project and $1 million to the TH 7 and Louisiana Ave grade separated interchange project in 2013. ƒ St. Louis Park’s Minnesota delegation, Sen. Ron Latz, Rep. Steve Simon and Rep. Ryan Winkler, successfully introduced legislation to require MnDOT to be more transparent with their projects/timelines and will require MnDOT’s Commissioner and Met Council to more closely align their transportation planning efforts when it comes to transportation projects with federal dollars. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 1) Page 4 Subject: Vision Update – Promoting Regional Transportation Issues and Related Dedicated Funding Sources ƒ SWLRT is moving forward with the DEIS and the Station Area Plans to keep the project on track for a 2014 bid letting. ƒ City Manager Tom Harmening, staff and Mayor Jacobs have met with Commissioner Gail Dorfman and her staff to discuss county funding possibilities for TH 7 & Wooddale Ave and the challenges with that intersection. ƒ Public Works continue to work hard to keep TH 7 & Wooddale Avenue and the TH100 Full Build project on schedule. Public Works staff has provided updates to Council periodically at study sessions over the last 1 ½ years. ƒ Senator Ron Latz, Representatives Simon and Winkler again introduced legislation in the 2008 session requesting funding for TH 7 & Wooddale Ave. ƒ Mayor Jacobs and staff met with Senator Steve Murphy and Representative Bernie Lieder to discuss the TH 7 & Wooddale Ave project and to discuss the hardship that local units of government have faced due to the financial constraints at MnDOT. Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 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: Grant Evaluation and Ranking System (GEARS) Committee RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council to discuss opportunity to serve of the Grant Evaluation and Ranking System (GEARS) Committee POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council have any interest in applying for this vacancy? BACKGROUND: City Manager Tom Harmening received the attached information from the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities (AMM) for elected officials to apply for the Grant Evaluation and Ranking System (GEARS) Committee, which will report to the newly created Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB). The GEARS committee will be made of elected officials from cities and counties, as well as the Chair of the Metropolitan Council’s Transportation Committee, and the committee will be responsible for ranking and evaluating transit requests submitted to the CTIB for funding. Applications are due on July 14, 2008. Mayor Jacobs is interested in having someone from St. Louis Park serve on the board and would like to know if anyone from the City Council is interested. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None VISION CONSIDERATION: None Attachment: AMM packet of information – GEARS Committee Prepared by: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 2 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 3 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 4 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 5 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 6 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 7 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 8 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 9 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 10 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 11 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 12 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 13 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 14 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 15 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 2) Subject: GEARS Committee Page 16 Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 2a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: CenterPoint Energy Community Partnership Grant Presentation. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Mayor is asked to join Victor Sundvall, a supervisor for CenterPoint Energy and also a resident of the City of St. Louis Park, in presenting the City of St. Louis Park Fire Department with a CenterPoint Energy Community Partnership Grant. The city received the grant in June of 2008. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None. BACKGROUND: CenterPoint Energy has been offering Community Partnership Grants for about four years. CenterPoint Energy is matching grants up to a maximum of $2500.00 for the communities that they serve. The grant may be used for firefighting equipment, communications equipment or any type of gas monitoring equipment. The City of St. Louis Park was in need of an additional gas monitoring device and an electric blower to ventilate buildings. The City of St. Louis Park was very pleased to be awarded a $1,700.00 grant from the Community Partnership Grant program through CenterPoint Energy to purchase this equipment. The City will match the grant amount by contributing $1,700.00 toward this purchase FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: City’s match on grant is $1,700 and is covered in the 2008 budget. VISION CONSIDERATION: None. Attachments: None Prepared by: Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION June 9, 2008 The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, C. Paul Carver, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt, Loran Paprocki, and Sue Sanger. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Clerk (Ms. Stroth), Finance Director (Mr. DeJong), Assistant Finance Director (Mr. Swanson), Police Chief (Mr. Luse), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Hughes). Guest: Steve McDonald, Abdo Eick & Meyers, LLP 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – June 23, 2008 Mr. Harmening presented the proposed Study Session agenda for June 23 and stated they will meet at 5:00 p.m. for a canoe trip; Council will be accompanied by representatives from Three Rivers Park District and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as well as representatives from Minnetonka City staff. He stated the focus of the canoe trip will be to discuss creek and park trail issues. He added after the canoe trip, Council will meet for a brief Study Session. Councilmember Finkelstein asked that the Three Rivers Park District provide Council with an update on bike trails. Councilmember Sanger asked that they also provide an update on the initiative previously mentioned about trying to do some things for the inner part of Hennepin County and not just the periphery. 2. Presentation of 2007 Consolidated Annual Financial Report (CAFR) – Audit Mr. DeJong introduced Steve McDonald and Brad Falteysek from Abdo Eick & Meyers, LLP, the City’s auditors. Mr. McDonald presented the 2007 financial report and explained that one significant change in this audit over prior year’s audits included the way in which they planned the audit. They spent more time getting an understanding of the City’s internal controls, which adds some context to the findings discussed in the report. He stated based on their objectives in the process and from all tests performed, everything looks good. Mr. McDonald presented their management letter and provided an overview of the significant audit findings. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Subject: Study Session Minutes June 9, 2008 Preparation of Audit Findings Mr. McDonald stated it is important to make sure all appropriate disclosures are in place; their preliminary draft includes a finding that internal controls should be in place to provide reasonable assurance over financial reporting. He explained they have recommended that the City utilize a disclosure checklist to ensure all required disclosures are presented and they are satisfied that the appropriate steps have been taken by the City to complete the disclosure checklist. Limited Segregation of Duties over Cash Disbursements, Cash Receipts, and Payroll Mr. McDonald stated they found the City to have limited segregation of duties related to cash disbursements, cash receipts, and payroll. He explained the existence of these limited segregations of duties increases the risk of fraud and error and they recommend the City review responsibilities of staff to limit the number of duties in more than one category that one person can perform in each of the major transaction cycles. He stated City staff is aware of the risks and plans to have further discussion in the current year to reduce the risk and put more efficient controls in place. Limited Segregation of Duties Relating to Offsite Material Transactions Mr. McDonald stated the audit reviewed procedures for scheduling, billing, and collecting ice time and building rental and found limited segregation of duties. In addition, there are no procedures for tracking concession inventory. He stated they are recommending the City review the responsibilities of the Rec Center to limit one person performing more than one of the categories within segregation of duties; in addition, they are recommending that the Rec Center utilize the finance department for finance related transactions such as billing and collection of rentals. He added the City is purchasing a point of sale software package for the Rec Center and they encourage the use of the inventory tracking capabilities that this software will allow in order to increase efficiencies and reduce risks of lost inventory. General Fund Balance Mr. McDonald presented an overview of the General Fund Balance compared to budget and stated there is an adequate balance in the fund and includes favorable results both on the revenue as well as the expenditure side. He noted expenditures are under budget by approximately $604,000, and half of that came from a positive variance in the Police Department. Special Revenue Funds Mr. McDonald reviewed the Special Revenue Funds and noted the balance has remained consistently level for the last several years; the largest fund in this category relates to police and fire pensions. Capital Projects Funds Mr. McDonald reviewed the Capital Projects Funds and noted one deficit in street capital projects, which will be eliminated with future revenue sources. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 3a) Page 3 Subject: Study Session Minutes June 9, 2008 Debt Service Funds Mr. McDonald reviewed the Debt Service Funds and stated the debt service funds are in good shape. Mr. DeJong interjected the City does not have a lot of debt per capita compared to most peer groups of cities and stated the City has a low debt ratio and a lot of debt capacity. Enterprise Funds Mr. McDonald provided an overview of the Enterprise Funds and stated these funds showed good improvement in operating ratios. He explained on a percentage basis, the City went from 2.3% to 6.1% and this increase is entirely based on unspent bond proceeds. He stated the Sewer Utility Fund is driven by capital acquisitions and is generating positive cash flow. He stated the Refuse Fund is showing improving margins from 2006 to 2007 and includes one year’s worth of operating expenses, with a good reserve level. Mr. DeJong stated it will be important to regularly review and revise rates for each of the City’s enterprise funds to ensure adequate funds and to determine when the City needs to issue bonds. Mr. McDonald stated the Storm Water Utility Fund shows an increase in the fund, with outstanding bonds of approximately $3.4 million. He stressed the importance of keeping up with rate studies and rate projections. Mr. McDonald stated the Wireless Fund will be closed out in 2008 and the cash deficit eliminated at the end of the year. Ratio Analysis Mr. McDonald then presented a ratio analysis of the City’s financial statements that provides additional information for trend and peer group analysis; the peer group average consists of an average of Abdo Eick & Meyers’ client base plus other select cities of similar size and geographic location. He stated the City’s percentage in debt to assets was 19% at the end of the year compared to 27% for the peer groups. He stated the City’s debt per capita has decreased to $708 per person and the City’s taxes per capita are a bit higher than the peer groups; this number may be impacted by TIF. Mr. McDonald reviewed the capital assets which are intended to show how new or old the City’s infrastructure is and stated business-type capital assets show 53% left to depreciate; the peer group shows 61%. He stated when a city nears the 50% level, it will begin to see more repair and maintenance. GASB Mr. McDonald explained GASB No. 45, a new accounting standard related to a city’s post- employment obligations. He stated this standard requires a city to book a liability on the financial statements intended to measure the cost of carrying retirees on its health insurance program. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 3a) Page 4 Subject: Study Session Minutes June 9, 2008 Council and staff had discussion relating to GASB No. 45 and its impact on the City’s financial statements. Councilmember Sanger asked Mr. McDonald if there is anything in the financial statements other than the control processes previously mentioned that cause significant concern. Mr. McDonald replied they are satisfied that was has been reported this evening are the only items they would consider significant. He added if you look at these items alone for what they are, they do not raise significant concerns; rather, the process is intended to assist a city in reviewing its internal controls to ensure accuracy and completion. Mr. DeJong expressed his thanks to the Finance Department staff for their efforts in completing the audit. 3. Liquor Licensees - 4 a.m. Closing during Republican National Convention Ms. Stroth asked the Council if they wish to allow the temporary 4:00 a.m. closing time to interested on-sale intoxicating liquor licensed establishments during the Republican National Convention from September 1-5, 2008. She stated state law provides all cities with the discretion to allow on-sale establishments to stay open until 4:00 a.m. and noted only a few establishments in the City expressed an interest. Councilmember Finkelstein stated he was not in favor of the 4:00 a.m. closing time, particularly in light of the long process recently undertaken to increase the penalties for liquor violations. Councilmember Sanger stated overall, she did not think the 4:00 a.m. closing time would be a problem, but agreed with Councilmember Finkelstein with respect to the new liquor violation penalty schedule. Chief Luse stated they expect most of the convention attendees will not be driving and instead will be transported by bus or shuttles between St. Paul and their hotels. Councilmember Carver stated he did not see any downside to extending the closing time. Councilmember Omodt stated the extended closing time is only for five days and stated he did not have a problem with it as long as Chief Luse was okay with it. Councilmember Basill stated he was neutral with respect to the extended closing time. Mayor Jacobs stated it appeared the majority of Council is in agreement with the extended closing time. Mr. Harmening stated this item will be on the City Council agenda for June 16. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 3a) Page 5 Subject: Study Session Minutes June 9, 2008 4. Highway 100 Reconstruction (Full Build) Project Update Mr. Rardin presented an update on the current project status, project schedule, and next steps. He reported that recent communications with Mn/DOT staff suggest the proposed Highway 100 project is undergoing an internal agency review with the intent of minimizing the project and its cost; Mn/DOT staff have indicated they do not have adequate funding available to meet all needs and are minimizing projects to the fullest extent possible. He stated it appears the project will be changed from an improvement project to an infrastructure replacement project, resulting in project costs being reduced by approximately 50%. He added Mn/DOT has made a commitment to noise walls because the highway violates noise standards. Mr. Rardin reviewed the preliminary changes to the project provided by Mn/DOT and noted if these changes are implemented, it appears the City will have very little, if any, opportunity to improve local transportation connections. He stated Mn/DOT staff appears committed to reconstruction occurring in 2015 and 2016. Councilmember Finkelstein asked about the impact of these changes to those homeowners who were waiting for Mn/DOT to make a decision. Mr. Rardin replied it has always been presumed that those homes will be removed as part of any highway project. Mr. Rardin stated Mn/DOT has given staff the impression that they will provide the City with its final decision on the project by July 1. It was the consensus of Council to wait until Mn/DOT provides its final decision on the project and then react accordingly. 5. City/School District Budgets Mr. Harmening stated that staff desires to continue the conversation with the City Council regarding how the City might assist the School District with its budget challenges, since not all Councilmembers were able to attend the May 27th meeting. He stated when the Council discussed this on May 27th, Council expressed a desire to work with the School District and to provide some fairly immediate assistance in the form of the City picking up the cost of the police liaison officers which are currently split 50/50, or approximately $85,000 per year per entity. He reported he met with Superintendent Bowers and her staff last week and reviewed the wish list to better understand what the School District is asking for. He stated he asked the School District representatives where they would use any assistance provided and their response was the monies would be used to help stabilize their budget and ultimately to try to sustain programs and services that they want to keep. Mr. Harmening suggested if the Council wants to do something right away, the City could waive the School District’s portion of the 2008 payment for the police liaison officers, which would be approximately $45,000; he recommended holding off on making any decision with respect to the Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 3a) Page 6 Subject: Study Session Minutes June 9, 2008 police liaison officers for 2009 until the City goes through its full budgeting process. He stated longer term, there are several policy questions for the Council to consider, including how recently enacted levy limits impact this issue, whether any assistance provided would be permanent/long term or short term and subject to being revisited, and whether the City should look at capital improvements identified by the School District differently than operational items. He stated an additional question to consider is whether the City Council wants to know exactly what the School District is going to do with any assistance provided, i.e., does the Council want to dictate what those cost savings might be used for. Councilmember Carver stated a paramount question for the City is whether one public entity can funnel money to another public entity. Mr. Harmening stated that the City Attorney reviewed the wish list and has indicated there are clearly some things the City can and cannot do; an example of something the City is not able to provide assistance for relates to social workers at the schools. He noted that the premise for the artificial turf and buildings is that it has a much greater potential for use by others in the community. Councilmember Carver stated if there are some efficiencies that can be realized by one entity taking over another’s activities, e.g., lawn care, that that is something which should be considered. Councilmember Sanger stated she would agree to waive the 2008 cost for the police liaison officers, and preferred to hold off on the rest of the items, particularly in light of the recently enacted levy limits. Councilmember Paprocki stated he would also agree to waive the cost for the police liaison officers as short term assistance. He concurred with Councilmember Carver’s comments regarding efficiencies that can be realized. Councilmember Finkelstein stated his agreement with waiving the cost for the police liaison officers; in terms of sidewalk installation, he felt that was the City’s responsibility anyway. Councilmember Basill reviewed the items on the wish list and stated at the May 27th meeting, the City Attorney indicated item #1 (snow plowing and lawn care) was something for which the City may be able to provide assistance and he would be agreeable to this item. He stated he has no problem with waiving the cost for the police liaison officers (item #2). He stated the Council discussed item #3 (Lenox costs for utilities/custodian) at great length on May 27th and the City Attorney has indicated this item may be acceptable and noted the City already provides some assistance with respect to Lenox. He reiterated that the City Attorney has indicated that the City is not able to provide funding assistance with respect to item #4 (social worker). He stated the City Attorney has indicated item #5 (election costs) would be okay and he does not have a problem with that item. He stated the City Attorney has said the City might be able to provide some assistance with respect to item #6 (field artificial turf and buildings). He indicated with respect to item #7 (custodian at Eliot), the City Attorney has stated the City would not be able to provide funding. He Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 3a) Page 7 Subject: Study Session Minutes June 9, 2008 stated that item #8 (City-run junior high athletics) was also discussed at length on May 27th and the City agreed to take over soccer and added he did not think the City should or could say no to this item. He expressed his agreement with Councilmember Paprocki regarding item #9 (sidewalk installation) as a one time cost. He stated the field turf presents an interesting concept for Council consideration and felt this is something that will benefit well beyond the School District. He added the Council should consider its Vision and felt the Council should be looking at this in terms of an overall community center. Councilmember Sanger expressed reservations about the wish list and added the field turf is not a project aimed at getting money freed up for the academics needed in the schools. She stated there are a significant number of parents who are upset with the School District because it is cutting academics and culture programs and added she felt strongly that the City should not put money into athletics when the School District is making significant cuts in academics. Councilmember Omodt stated he did not have a problem with one entity helping out another and felt the City should view the community center issue as an opportunity. Councilmember Carver stated it will be important to make certain the City is looking at demonstrable efficiencies as it relates to the current atmosphere as well as the levy limits. Councilmember Finkelstein stated the community center might make good sense and felt it was worth exploring further. Mayor Jacobs stated the artificial turf presents an opportunity for partnering with the School District to build something that the community has already expressed an interest in. Mr. Harmening stated that later this year as part of the Council’s Vision process, there will be a specific presentation to the Council on a multi use center, including what functions it will serve. Mr. Harmening stated he will plan to have the police liaison officers 2008 funding request on the regular agenda for Council action on June 16th. 6. Communications (Verbal) Mr. Harmening updated Council on a recent meeting with representatives from STEP and stated they discussed several available options related to STEP’s relocation. He stated the Council may wish to consider some financial assistance with STEP’s transitional costs; he added that STEP understands why the City needs to move forward with the project and staff has agreed to continue to meet with STEP to help them with their relocation efforts. Mr. Harmening stated the recent hail storm caused significant damage to the recent plantings along Excelsior Boulevard. He indicated that staff will be filing an insurance claim as an uninsured loss. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 3a) Page 8 Subject: Study Session Minutes June 9, 2008 Mayor Jacobs handed out bookmarks for distribution at the parade on Saturday and stated the Council is #8 in the line-up. The meeting adjourned at 8:27 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 7. City Sales Tax Audit Report 8. Critical Incident Preparedness Training 9. Highway 7 / Wooddale Avenue Interchange Project Update ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Bid Tabulation: Street Maintenance Project (Sealcoat Streets - Area 8) – Project No. 2008-0001 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to designate Pearson Bros. Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of contract with the firm in the amount of $286,572.60 for Street Maintenance Project (Sealcoat Streets - Area 8) – Project No. 2008-0001 POLICY CONSIDERATION: None BACKGROUND: Sealcoating is the surface application of an asphalt material followed by the placement of aggregate (rock) which is embedded into the asphalt material while it is liquid. The purpose of this treatment is to add surface friction to the pavement, facilitating vehicle traction, and to seal the surface from oxidation and the effects of moisture. Sealcoating can extend the life of a pavement, in good condition, by 5-9 years. The City’s Pavement Management Program provides for the sealcoating of each street once every eight (8) years. Area 8 of the Pavement Management Program is scheduled for sealcoating in 2008. These streets were last sealcoated in the early 1990’s. Area 8 comprises the streets in the Blackstone, Cedarhurst, Lake Forest and Fern Hill neighborhoods. A map of the streets to be sealcoated is attached. Not all streets in Area 8 will be sealcoated. Based on the city’s computerized pavement management software and visual inspections by City staff, several streets in the area were determined to be in need of more aggressive maintenance than has been done in the past. Sealcoating these streets at this time would be an inappropriate use of resources. Thus, they have been eliminated from this sealcoat project with the understanding that they are scheduled for higher levels of maintenance or rehabilitation in 2012, as part of the overall Pavement Management Program. BID ANALYSIS: Bids for the project were received on July 1, 2008. An Advertisement for Bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on June 19, 2008 and in the Construction Bulletin on June 16, 2008. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4a ) Page 2 Subject: Bid Tabulation - Street Maintenance Project 2008-0001 A summary of the bid results is as follows: CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT Pearson Brothers, Inc. $286,572.60 Allied Blacktop Company $338,113.07 Engineer’s Estimate $354,095.25 Two (2) contractors submitted bids. A review of the bids indicates Pearson Brothers, Inc. submitted the lowest bid. Pearson Brothers is a reputable contractor who has worked for the City before. Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $286,572.60. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Costs for sealcoating the local streets will be paid from the City’s Pavement Management Fund. Municipal State Aid streets in Area 8 that are sealcoated will be paid from the Citywide Public Works Operations budget. The 2008 Capital Improvement Program has budgeted $279,430 for this year’s sealcoat project. The bid amounts are larger than our CIP budget due to the rising oil costs we are experiencing this year. However, our low bid price appears competitive and is within the overall budget of the Pavement Management Fund. PROJECT TIMING: This work is expected to take place between August 1 and August 31. The entire process on a given street takes approximately 72 hours. Streets will be posted for “No Parking” beginning the day before work is to occur. Residents will receive notice of the impending construction and parking restrictions. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachment: Map Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4a ) Page 3 Subject: Bid Tabulation - Street Maintenance Project 2008-0001 Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4b Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Approve special assessment for water service line repair at 3053 Georgia Avenue South. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the attached resolution establishing a special assessment for the repair of the water service line at 3053 Georgia Avenue South. POLICY CONSIDERATION: The proposed action is consistent with policy previously established by the City Council. BACKGROUND: Sylvia Rhode, owner of the single family residence at 3053 Georgia Avenue has requested the City to authorize the repair of the water service line for her home and assess the cost against the property in accordance with the City’s special assessment policy. Analysis: The City requires the repair of service lines to promote the general public health, safety and welfare within the community. The special assessment policy for the repair or replacement of water or sewer service lines for existing homes was adopted by the City Council in 1996. This program was put into place because sometimes property owners face financial hardships when emergency repairs like this are unexpectedly required. Plans and permits for this service line repair work were completed, submitted, and approved by City staff. The property owner hired a contractor and repaired the water service line in compliance with current codes and regulations. Based on the completed work, this repair qualifies for the City’s special assessment program. The property owner has petitioned the City to authorize the water service line repair and special assess the cost of the repair. The total eligible cost of the repair has been determined to be $4,940.00. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The City has funds in place to finance the cost of this special assessment. VISION CONSIDERATION: N/A Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Scott Anderson, Utility Superintendent Through: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director Bruce DeJong, Director of Finance Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 Subject: Approve Special Assessment for 3053 Georgia Ave So RESOLUTION NO. 08-____ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR THE REPAIR OF THE WATER SERVICE LINE AT 3053 GEORGIA AVENUE SOUTH, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN WHEREAS, the Property Owner at 3053 Georgia Avenue has petitioned the City of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the water service line for the single family residence located at 3053 Georgia Avenue; and WHEREAS, the Property Owner has agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, right of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the Utility Superintendent related to the repair of the water service line. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1. The petition from the Property Owner requesting the approval and special assessment for the water service line repair is hereby accepted. 2. The water service line repair that was done in conformance with the plans and specifications approved by the Public Works Department and Department of Inspections is hereby accepted. 3. The total cost for the repair of the water service line is accepted at $4,940.00. 4. The Property Owner has agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, notice and appeal from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by other statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law. 5. The Property Owner has agreed to pay the City for the total cost of the above improvements through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at the interest rate of the 20 year Treasury bill rate on November 1, 2008 plus one percent (1%), which assessment is hereby adopted. 6. The Property Owner has executed an agreement with the City and all other documents necessary to implement the repair of the water service line and the special assessment of all costs associated therewith. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4c Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Final Payment Resolution - Contract 16-07 – Champion Coatings, Inc. (2006-2300). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing final payment in the amount of $7,000.00 for water reservoir exterior rehabilitation located at 2936 Idaho Avenue, Project No. 2006-2300 with Champion Coatings, Inc., City Contract No. 16-07. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: On February 20, 2007 the City Council approved Contract No. 16-07 with Champion Coatings, Inc. in the amount of $78,525.00 for exterior rehabilitation of the Ground Water Storage Reservoir at Water Treatment Plant (WTP) No. 1 located at 2936 Idaho Avenue. The reservoir is a 1.5 million gallon steel reservoir that was constructed in 1946. Over the years the reservoir has been recoated several times. The most recent rehabilitation work was done in 1997, which included recoating the interior, recoating the exterior, and replacement of the roof. This past year staff determined the exterior of the reservoir was in need of re-coating. The recoating process consists of removing the existing coating through sandblasting and recoating with a primer and finish coat application. On November 5, 2007 the City Council approved Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $42,625 for additional exterior brush blasting and coating The Contractor completed this work within the contract time allowed at a final contract cost of $121,150. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost for this project has been provided for in the Water Utility Fund budget. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachment: Resolution Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator Reviewed by: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4c) Page 2 Subject: Final Payment Resolution - Champion Coatings Project 2006-2300 RESOLUTION NO. 08-_____ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON THE WATER RESERVOIR LOCATED AT 2936 IDAHO AVENUE RECOAT/CLEAN RESERVOIR NO. 1 CITY PROJECT NO. 2006-2300 CONTRACT NO. 16-07 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated February 20, 2007, Champion Coatings, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the recoat/clean Reservoir No. 1 project, as per Contract No. 16-07. 2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the work. 3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. Original Contract Price $ 78,525.00 Change Orders $ 42,625.00 Previous Payments $114,150.00 Balance Due $ 7,000.00 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4d Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: City Hall Exterior Renovations – Project No. 2008-2700. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Accepting the Project Report, Establishing Improvement Project No. 2008-2700, Approving Plans and Specifications, and Authorizing Advertisement for Bids for Improvement Project No 2008-2700. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: City Hall was built in 1963. Since that time routine maintenance has been done on the exterior of the building. Staff noted some deterioration of the exposed aggregate surfaces in 2006 and hired INSPEC, a consulting firm with a division that specializes in exterior, vertical surfaces, to do a condition survey on the building. DISSCUSSION: The subsequent consultant report indentified specific areas that needed repair and suggested improvements to extend the lifecycle of the building. After reviewing the study and the scope of work needed, staff realized this would be a good opportunity to update the appearance of the building. Staff worked with INSPEC designers to come up with color/texture scheme that will modernize the look of the building. The proposed project will consist of the following: • Repairs to the vertical surfaces (aggregate, brick, caulking etc.) • Sealing the exposed aggregate portions of the walls with a colored elastomeric acrylic coating • Installation of a louvered metal accent band around the top of the building • Installation of louvered metal screening round the mechanical equipment on the roof to comply with our Zoning Ordinance. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4d) Page 2 Subject: City Hall Exterior Renovations – Project 2008-2700 Timetable for project: • Approval of Plans/Authorization to Bid by City Council July 7, 2008 • Advertise for bids Construction Bulletin July 14 & 21, 2008 • Advertise for bids Sun Sailor July 17 & 24, 2008 • Bid Opening July 28, 2008 • Bid Tab Report to City Council; Award Contract August 4, 2008 • Construction Late August to October 2008 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This CIP project has an overall budget of $300,000 for 2008. The first phase consisting of repairs and recoating is estimated to cost $170,000. Phase two, the metal work, will be bid out separately to control costs and coordinate installation. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: John Altepeter, Facilities Superintendent Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4d) Page 3 Subject: City Hall Exterior Renovations – Project 2008-2700 RESOLUTION NO. 08-____ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PROJECT REPORT, ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2008-2700 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2008-2700 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the Facilities Superintendent related to the City Hall Exterior Renovations. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1. The Project Report regarding Project No. 2008-2700 is hereby accepted. 2. Such improvements as proposed are necessary, cost effective, and feasible as detailed in the Project Report. 3. The proposed project, designated as Project No. 2008-2700, is hereby established and ordered. 4. The plans and specifications for the making of these improvements, as prepared under the direction of the Facilities Superintendent, or designee, are approved. 5. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least two weeks in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids for the making of said improvements under said-approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall appear not less than ten (10) days prior to the date and time bids will be received by the City Clerk, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a bid bond payable to the City for five (5) percent of the amount of the bid. 6. The Facilities Superintendent, or designee, shall report the receipt of bids to the City Council shortly after the letting date. The report shall include a tabulation of the bid results and a recommendation to the City Council. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4e Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Motion to Approve Out-of-State Travel for Mayor Jeff Jacobs, June 10-13, 2008. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve out-of-state travel for Mayor Jacobs to Washington D.C. from June 10-13, 2008. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to MN Statute 471.661 and Resolution No. 06-007, City of St. Louis Park Elected Official Out-of-State Travel Policy, the Council is required to approve any travel outside the State of Minnesota for elected officials. This is a housekeeping item requesting that Council approval the out-of-state travel after the fact, as this item should have been placed on the June 2, 2008 Council agenda. Staff apologizes for this item coming to Council for formal approval after the date of travel. Formal approval by Council is required by MN Statute. Mayor Jeff Jacobs traveled to Washington, D.C. and spent June 12, 2008 meeting with the Minnesota delegation to discuss transportation issues as it specifically relates to the City of St. Louis Park, MN. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This is a 2008 budgeted item. VISION CONSIDERATION: Mayor Jacobs’ meetings with elected officials to discuss transportation needs is key to “Promoting regional transportation issues and related dedicated funding sources affecting St. Louis Park including but not limited to Hwy. 100 and SWLRT.” Attachment: None Prepared by: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting Date: July7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4f 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: 2942 Boone Avenue South (Fretham 9th Addition) plat approval extension RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve a one year extension for the filing of the final plat titled “Fretham 9th Addition.” POLICY CONSIDERATION: None. BACKGROUND: Lakewest Development Co., LLC, received approval of the final plat of “Fretham 9th Addition” on November 19th, 2007. The developer has requested a one year time extension to file the plat. It remains the developer’s intent to begin construction on the project in 2008. However, due to market considerations related to sales of single family homes, the developer believes a time extension is necessary to ensure that the final product is of the highest possible quality. The one year extension will expire July 7, 2009. Because the plat must be filed prior to the issuance of a building permit, it is expected that the plat will be filed in advance of that date. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: This item supports construction of single family homes which fits with our Vision statement: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. Attachments: None. Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Planner Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4g 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’s consent for Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority’s (HCHRA) funding of the Wayside House Jersey Ave supportive housing stabilization project. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Move to approve Resolution consenting to the participation of Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority with the Wayside Jersey Avenue supportive housing stabilization project. POLICY CONSIDERATION: This project addresses the City’s housing goal of ensuring affordable housing is well maintained. BACKGROUND: Wayside House is a non-profit community organization committed to substance abuse rehab and recovery for women and their families. In addition to its Jersey Avenue supportive housing, Wayside House operates a primary and half-way house treatment facility in St. Louis Park, where its main offices are located, and a family reunification facility in Minneapolis. Wayside House provides permanent housing for recovering chemically dependent women and their children, whose incomes are at or below 50-80% of the median income. Their apartment buildings are located at 1349 and 1351 Jersey Ave S. The HCHRA has approved $85,000 in Affordable Housing Incentive Funds (AHIF) for Wayside’s project contingent on the city’s consent to the HCHRA’s participation. Wayside House is proposing significant improvements to the 20 unit Jersey Ave apartment buildings. The scope of work includes improvements to increase energy savings as well as increasing tenant comfort. The improvements are: replacement of all windows and all four patio doors in both buildings; replacement of glass, frames, and doors at four building entrances; relining of sewer line; replacement of hallway carpeting & stair covering; and painting of exterior wood siding The scope of work and cost estimate was developed by Blumenthal/Architecture. They were assisted by price quotations from a sewer repair subcontractor and window replacement subcontractor. Wayside has contracted with Hart-Shegos & Associates for project management. A July loan closing is scheduled with construction to begin yet this summer. In 2007, the Council allocated $15,000 of St. Louis Park’s Community Development Block Grant funds to assist with improvements to the Wayside House Jersey Avenue Apartments. This initial funding assisted Wayside in their efforts to secure other funding as noted below. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4g) Page 2 Subject: HCHRA Funding of Wayside House Jersey Ave Housing Stabilization Project Project Funders Amount St. Louis Park-CDBG $ 15,000 Hennepin County AHIF Grant $ 85,000 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Loan $225,075 Hennepin County TOD grant $ 50,000 Total $375,075 St. Louis Park’s consent to HCHRA’s participation enables the Wayside Jersey Ave Apartment improvements to move forward. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The costs of this project are well leveraged with state, county, and city CDBG funds. The $15,000 CDBG funds were allocated in 2007, and will be expended in a timely manner, by the end of 2008. VISION CONSIDERATION: The City’s Vision states that St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and diverse housing stock. This project is consistent with the Vision in that it improves housing for low income residents. Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Kathy Larsen, Housing Programs Coordinator Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Director of Community Development Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4g) Page 3 Subject: HCHRA Funding of Wayside House Jersey Ave Housing Stabilization Project RESOLUTION NO. 08-_______ RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PARTICPATION OF HENNEPIN COUNTY HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WITH THE WAYSIDE JERSEY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING STABILIZATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HCHRA) in Resolution No. 07-HCHRA-13 has approved the use of a $85,000 Affordable Housing Incentive Fund loan for the Wayside Jersey Supportive Housing physical stabilization project, contingent upon the City of St. Louis Park’s consent to the HCHRA’s participation in the project; and WHEREAS, the Wayside Jersey Supportive Housing physical stabilization project will increase/preserve the supply of affordable housing in the City of St. Louis Park by preserving 20 units of affordable housing at the Wayside Jersey Supportive Housing site at 1341-1349 Jersey Avenue in the City of St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the loan from the HCHRA will complete the financing required for the project to go forward. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City of St. Louis Park City Council that it consents to the participation of the Hennepin County Housing and Redevelopment Authority in the Wayside Jersey Supportive Housing Stabilization. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4h 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: Record of Decision for Minnehaha Creek Restoration EAW RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve a resolution certifying the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) prepared for the Minnehaha Creek Restoration – Methodist Hospital dated January 25, 2007 as an adequate examination of the environmental impacts of the proposed development and accepting the Record of Decision, including Response to Comments, Findings of Fact and Conclusion declaring no need for an Environmental Impact Statement. POLICY CONSIDERATION: The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Methodist Hospital Campus General Development Plan. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital proposes to restore 1,060 linear feet of straightened channel of Minnehaha Creek to its former channel on Methodist Hospital and City of St. Louis Park property between Louisiana Avenue and Excelsior Boulevard. This action will add approximately 400 linear feet of channel, enhance four acres of existing wetland, and add an interpretive boardwalk in the wetland area. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District will fund a portion of the project. This plan has been in the works for nearly two years. Howard R. Green Company prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Minnehaha Creek Restoration project, on behalf of Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital. The EAW examined the potential environmental effects of the proposed project. Projects determined to have the potential for significant negative environmental effects must do further environmental review, in the form of an environmental impact statement (EIS). City staff finds the Minnehaha Creek Restoration project does not have the potential for significant negative environmental effects. BACKGROUND: The City Council reviewed and approved a temporary easement and a long-term use and maintenance agreement for the project on December 4, 2006. Since the City Council’s action in December 2006, Park Nicollet completed an EAW, submitted the EAW to various agencies for review, and responded to the comments from those agencies. City staff reviewed the EAW, agency comments and responses to the comments, and finds they satisfy the environmental review requirements. Before the project can proceed, the City (the Responsible Governmental Unit or RGU) must certify the EAW and send reviewing agencies its record of decision that further environmental review, in the form of an environmental impact statement (EIS), is not needed. Park Nicollet will also need to secure a conditional use permit for the excavation, fill and grading on the site from City of St. Louis Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4h) Page 2 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration/Methodist Hospital Record of Decision Park. Park Nicollet submitted a conditional use permit application. The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on August 6, and the conditional use permit may be on the City Council’s August 18 agenda. Work is planned to begin in October, or soon thereafter, when creek levels are low. VISION CONSIDERATION: This item is in line with the Vision Strategic Direction: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental stewardship. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: There is no budget impact associated with this item. PUBLIC PROCESS: Notice of the availability of the EAW for public review was published in the Environmental Quality Board Monitor on February 12, 2007. Copies of the EAW were sent to the required reviewing agencies prior to the February 12, 2007 publication date. The mandated 30-day comment period ended on March 14, 2007. Five agencies sent comments, including Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and City of St. Louis Park. The main issues related to licensing, permitting and temporary impacts during construction to traffic, bus stops, utilities, etc. The comments also included DNR support of the project, but also a request to consider relocating proposed boardwalks out of, or to the edge of, the wetland to minimize potential human disturbance to wildlife. In response, the designs of the boardwalk changed to elevate the boardwalk three feet above the ordinary high water level of the creek to minimize the impact to the site. A list of the comments and responses are included as Appendix B to the EAW. After considering the anticipated environmental impacts outlined in the EAW, and the comments received, City staff finds no significant environmental impacts associated with the project, and no need for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. ATTACHMENTS: ƒ City Council Resolution, including Record of Decision *The Environmental Assessment Worksheet is a 35-page document that is on file with the City Clerk’s office for review and available upon request. Prepared by: Sean Walther, Senior Planner Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Scott Brink, City Engineer Jim Vaughan, Environmental Coordinator Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4h) Page 3 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration/Methodist Hospital Record of Decision RESOLUTION NO. 08-__________ APPROVING RECORD OF DECISION AND THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE MINNEHAHA CREEK RESTORATION – METHODIST HOSPITAL 6500 & 6550 Excelsior Boulevard WHEREAS, Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital is the Proposer of a project to restore 1,060 linear feet of straightened channel of Minnehaha Creek to its former channel on Methodist Hospital and City of St. Louis Park property. This action will add approximately 400 linear feet of channel, enhance four acres of existing wetland, and add an interpretive boardwalk in the wetland area (“Project”); and WHEREAS, the Project falls within the mandatory environmental assessment worksheet (“EAW”) category of Minn. Rules Part 4410.4300, Subpart 26 Streams and Ditches; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is the Responsible Governmental Unit (“RGU”) pursuant to Minn. Rules Part 4410.4300, Subpart 26; and WHEREAS, an EAW was prepared by Howard R. Green Company, on behalf of the Proposer, who submitted completed data portions of the EAW to the City of St. Louis Park consistent with Minn. Rules Part 4410.1400; and WHEREAS, the EAW was prepared using the form approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board for EAWs in accordance with Minn. Rules Part 4410.1300; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park submitted a copy of the EAW to all public agencies on the EAW distribution list and published EAW availability in the EQB Monitor on February 12, 2007 in accordance with applicable State laws, rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, the comment period closed on March 14, 2007 and five regulatory agencies submitted written comments during the comment period; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park acknowledges the comments from Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and the City of St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, City staff reviewed the proposed Record of Decision and finds it to be consistent with the evidence submitted to the City and the applicable statutes and regulations, to the best of their knowledge, and recommends the City Council approve the Record of Decision and determine that no environmental impact statement (“EIS”) is necessary, reasonable or warranted with respect to the Project under the circumstances; and Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4h) Page 4 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration/Methodist Hospital Record of Decision WHEREAS, the City Council desires to make the Findings of Fact contained within the Record of Decision and to conclude that no EIS is required with respect to the Project (“Negative Declaration”). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby: 1. Adopt and approve the Record of Decision on the Minnehaha Creek Restoration – Methodist Hospital Environmental Assessment Worksheet in the form which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and hereby makes the Findings of Fact and Conclusions which are contained therein; and 2. Find and determine that, based upon the Record of Decision, no environmental impact statement is required for the Project pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act or Minnesota Rules Parts 4410.0200 to 4410.6500. Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 ___________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Reviewed for Administration: _______________________________ City Manager Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4h) Page 5 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration/Methodist Hospital Record of Decision “EXHIBIT A” City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota RECORD OF DECISION FINDINGS OF FACT, RESPONSES TO COMMENTS, and CONCLUSIONS DATE: July 7, 2008 RE: Determination of Need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) PROJECT: Minnehaha Creek Restoration – Methodist Hospital LOCATION: 6500, 6550 Excelsior Boulevard FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital is the Proposer of a project to restore 1,060 linear feet of straightened channel of Minnehaha Creek to its former channel on Methodist Hospital and City of St. Louis Park property. This action will add approximately 400 linear feet of channel, enhance four acres of existing wetland, and add an interpretive boardwalk in the wetland area (“Project”); and 2. The Project falls within the mandatory environmental assessment worksheet (“EAW”) category of Minn. Rules Part 4410.4300, subp. 26 Streams and Ditches; and 3. The City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, is the Responsible Governmental Unit (“RGU”) pursuant to Minn. Rules Part 4410.4300, subp. 26; and 4. An EAW was prepared by Howard R. Green Company, on behalf of the Proposer, who submitted completed data portions of the EAW to the City of St. Louis Park consistent with Minn. Rules Part 4410.1400; and 5. The EAW was prepared using the form approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) for EAWs in accordance with Minn. Rules Part 4410.1300; and 6. The EAW is incorporated by reference in this Record of Decision; and 7. The EAW was filed with the MEQB and notice for its availability for public review and comment was published in the EQB Monitor on February 12, 2007. A copy of the EAW was sent to all persons on the MEQB Distribution List and to persons who requested a copy; and Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4h) Page 6 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration/Methodist Hospital Record of Decision 8. The 30-day public review and comment period opened on February 12, 2007 and ended March 14, 2007closed on March 14, 2007 and comments were received from five state agencies during the comment period; and 9. During the 30-day public review and comment period, five agencies submitted written comments on the EAW, including Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Metropolitan Council, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and City of St. Louis Park; and RESPONSES TO COMMENTS 1. Comments by City of St. Louis Park. Letter received January 23, 2007. Comment 1-1: It is presumed that any dewatering will be limited to the project property, and will require a permit from DNR or MN Department of Health, as applicable. Any discharge into City facilities (sanitary sewer or storm sewer) will require a permit from the City of St. Louis Park. Response: Minimal dewatering anticipated. All dewatering will be limited to project area as needed, no discharge to storm or sanitary facilities anticipated. Comment is noted. Comment 1-2: A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) will be required for any displacement (removal or importing of fill) in excess of 400 cubic yards. Response: A Conditional Use Permit application has been submitted to the City of St. Louis Park for review and approval. Comment 1-3: Any specific plant material and vegetative plantings (in addition to trees), including establishment of the creek bank must be reviewed by the City Environmental Coordinator. Response: A permit package has been submitted to the City for review. Comment 1-4: FEMA is currently in the process of updating/revising flood insurance rate maps for Hennepin County including the Minnehaha Creek Watershed. This is referred to in the EAW as the XPSWMM evaluation. FEMA, with support of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DNR, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, and the City of St. Louis Park are currently working to establish an updated 100-year elevation for the creek at the project location. Establishment and approval of this elevation may or may not have an impact on the project design as proposed. Response: Methodist Hospital and the City of St. Louis Park engineering staff are aware of the 100-year elevation being updated and have determined that the project will not have an impact on the flood elevation, nor will the revised elevation have an impact on the proposed project design. Methodist Hospital will continue to coordinate project design details with FEMA, Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4h) Page 7 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration/Methodist Hospital Record of Decision USACE, DNR, and the City of St. Louis Park to accommodate the updated 100-year flood elevation. A no-rise certification has been approved by the City of St. Louis Park Engineering Department. Comment 1-5: In addition to the list of required permits and associated agencies provided in the EAW, an Erosion Control permit will also be required from both the City and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Response: Comment is noted. An erosion control permit has been approved by MCWD. An erosion control permit has been applied for through the City of St. Louis Park. Comment 1-6: A long term use and maintenance agreement for the boardwalk and trail system, the Creek itself, and other improvements as proposed must be approved by both the City and the property owner, including agreed uses on both public and private property. This would include the granting of an easement for public access to the proposed boardwalk, and access for maintenance of the Creek. The City land is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as Park and open Space, and was recently rezoned to POS (Park and Open Space). A Maintenance Declaration dated March 25, 2008 (Exhibit C to the Funding Agreement) was recently executed by PNHS, MCWD and the City and is being recorded at Hennepin County. Response: Comment is noted. The St. Louis Park City Council approved a motion to grant temporary easements for construction of the project on 12/04/07. Methodist Hospital will continue to coordinate with the City on negotiating long term use and maintenance agreement for the proposed boardwalk. Comment 1-7: Review of the boardwalk will be subject to the review of the City Building official. Response: Comment is noted. The information will be passed along to Methodist Hospital. Comment 1-8: The Plan View Sheet (2 of 6) refers to an existing utility to be located. It is unknown what this utility is specifically (or if it actually exists). This should be verified further. Response: The unknown utility shown on Plan View Sheet (2 of 6) has been identified as fiber optic cable. This fiber optic cable will be relocated outside the proposed project area by others. 2. Comments by Jessica Ebertz, Project Manager Environmental Review and Operations Section, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Letter received March 8, 2007. Comment 2-1: The MPCA has received copies of the EAW prepared for the above project, prepared by the City of St. Louis Park, Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU). The MPCA has not reviewed the EAW for this project; therefore, the MPCA has no specific comments to provide to the RGU. This decision not to review the EAW does not constitute waiver by the MPCA of any pending permits required by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4h) Page 8 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration/Methodist Hospital Record of Decision We remind the RGU that pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.1700, Subpart 5 (Environmental Quality Board Rules), a copy of the RGU’s decision on this EAW needs to be sent to the MPCA. Response: The comment is noted and a copy of the City’s Record of Decision (ROD) will be sent to the MPCA. 3. Comments by James B. Wisker, District Technician, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). Letter received March 12, 2007. Comment 3-1: After reviewing the EAW for the Methodist Hospital Creek Restoration Project it was determined that a MCWD permit would be required to complete the project. The permit will cover a host of activities regulated by District Rules. These regulations are outlined below. Response: The MCWD erosion control permit has been applied for and approved. 4. Comments by Phyllis Hanson, Local Planning Assistance Manager, Metropolitan Council. Letter received March 13, 2007. Comment 4-1: Council staff has reviewed the EAW and finds that it is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional purposes. However, staff offers the following comments for your consideration. Response: The comment is noted. Comment 4-2: Metro Transit currently has two bus stops on Excelsior Blvd., one east bound and one west bound, which serve the hospital. These are located near the creek. Easy pedestrian access should be provided from the bus stops to the main entrance. Response: The proposed project is not anticipated to affect the two bus stops along Excelsior Blvd. and will not impede pedestrian access to the main entrance of Methodist Hospital. Comment 4-3: There is a Metropolitan Council Forcemain Interceptor (1-SLP-470) located near this project at the intersection of Minnehaha Creek and Excelsior Blvd. (Co Road 3). To assess potential impacts to our interceptor system, prior to initiating this project, final plans should be sent to Scott Dentz, Interceptor Engineering Manager (651-602-4503) at the Metropolitan Environmental Services Division for review and comments. Response: The proposed project is not anticipated to affect the Metropolitan Council Forcemain Interceptor (1-SLP-470) located at the intersection of Excelsior Blvd. and Minnehaha Creek. Information regarding submittal of final plans to Metropolitan Council for review and comment will be passed on to Methodist Hospital. 5. Comments by Joseph M. Kurcinka, Regional Director, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Letter received March 14, 2007. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4h) Page 9 Subject: Minnehaha Creek Restoration/Methodist Hospital Record of Decision Comment 5-1: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EAW prepared for the Minnehaha Creek Restoration project in the City of St. Louis Park. The DNR supports and encourages efforts to restore stream functions throughout the state and commends Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital for its willingness to restore Minnehaha Creek through the hospital property. In general, the EAW appears complete and accurate. We offer the following comments for your consideration. Response: The comment is noted. Comment 5-2: The EAW does not quantify wetland impacts resulting from the construction of the channel, boardwalk, and pond in the existing wetland. This agency, along with other state and federal agencies, the watershed district, and the City will resolve wetland impact issues during review of the Section 404 permit, the public waters permit, and the Wetland Conservation Act wetland replacement plan. Response: Comment is noted. A Section 404 permit has been approved by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Public Waters and WCA permit are pending final approval of the EAW record of decision by the City of St. Louis Park. Comment 5-3: We have some concerns regarding the interpretive boardwalk proposal, particularly the plan to construct the walkway within the wetland itself. While we agree that there is value in bringing people close to nature, we need to take care that in doing so we do not create conditions in which human activity can disrupt natural processes, particularly wildlife behavior. In most cases, locating trails along wetland edges results in less encroachment and disturbance to the wetlands. We recommend that the City encourage Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital to consider moving the boardwalk and overlook out of the wetland or closer to the edge. Response: Comment is noted. The boardwalk portion of the project was initially envisioned by Methodist Hospital as an opportunity to provide access to nature for patients, staff, and the general public. By allowing for access into the “heart” of the wetland, the amenity will afford users, especially hospital patients, the opportunity to enjoy a natural space separate from the urban hospital environment. The boardwalk location was discussed, and based on the desire to connect the hospital facility to Louisiana Avenue and provide users a direct connection to the wetland, the proposed boardwalk alignment was selected. Since receiving this comment from the DNR, the boardwalk design changed from a floating system to a fixed system that is elevated three feet above the ordinary high water level to reduce impacts to the site. This design change was acceptable to a technical evaluation panel that met on September 28, 2007 and included two DNR representatives. CONCLUSION The written comments received do not support a need for an Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Project. Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4i 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: Authorizing publication of notice of Public Hearing on August 4, 2008 for the refinancing of a group home located at 9011 34th Street West (the “St. Louis Park Facility”). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Request to approve Resolution authorizing the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing and establishing the date for a public hearing regarding the issuance of revenue obligations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the “Housing Program Act”) and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 to 469.1651 (the “Industrial Development Act”) in order to finance the cost of a project described below to be undertaken by Community Involvement Programs. POLICY CONSIDERATION: The proposed action is consistent with policy previously established by the City Council. BACKGROUND: Community Involvement Programs is a Minnesota non-profit that operates group homes in the cities of Crystal, Golden Valley, Hinckley, Hopkins, Minnetonka, New Hope, Richfield, St. Louis Park and Sandstone. The group home in St. Louis Park provides valuable assistance to those who are in need in the community. They desire to refinance their properties due to favorable economic conditions. The City of Sandstone will be issuing private activity revenue bonds to accomplish this refunding of their existing mortgages. The City of St. Louis Park is a host city and needs to provide consent to the financing for the facility in our jurisdiction. These bonds are not obligations of the City of St. Louis Park and will be repaid solely through revenues of the projects. Further, these notes or other obligations will not constitute a charge against the credit or taxing powers of the City. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: There is no cost or obligation on the part of the City of St. Louis Park. VISION CONSIDERATION: N/A Attachments: Resolution Notice of Public Hearing Prepared by: Bruce DeJong, Director of Finance Brian Swanson, Assistant Finance Director Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4i) Page 2 Subject: Publication of Notice of Public Hearing for Community Involvement Programs Project RESOLUTION NO. 08-_____ RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE HOUSING AND HEALTH CARE FACILITIES, AND AUTHORIZING THE PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF THE HEARING (COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAMS PROJECT) WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the “Housing Program Act”), confers upon cities, the power to issue revenue bonds to finance multifamily housing developments; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.1651, relating to municipal industrial development (the “Industrial Development Act”), gives municipalities the power to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of the encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce to prevent so far as possible the emergence of blighted and marginal lands and areas of chronic unemployment; and WHEREAS, Community Involvement Programs, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation and 501(c)(3) organization (the “Borrower”), has proposed that the City of Hinckley, Minnesota (the “Issuer”), issue a revenue note or obligations (in one or more series) (the “Revenue Note”) pursuant to the Housing Program Act and the Industrial Development Act to finance a project, a portion of which is located in the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”); and WHEREAS, the City has been advised that a public hearing and City Council approval of the financing of the project is required under Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code because a portion of facilities to be financed or refinanced by the Revenue Note are located in the City; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows: 1. A public hearing on the proposal of the Borrower will be held at the time and place set forth in the Notice of Public Hearing hereto attached. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearing to be given one publication in the official newspaper of the City and also in a newspaper of general circulation available in the City, not less than 14 days nor more than 30 days prior to the date fixed for the hearing, substantially in the form of the attached Notice of Public Hearing. Adopted by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, this 7th day of July, 2008. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4i) Page 3 Subject: Publication of Notice of Public Hearing for Community Involvement Programs Project Attachment: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE A PROJECT BY COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT PROGRAMS Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”), will meet at the City Hall in St. Louis Park, at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, August 4, 2008, to consider giving host approval to the issuance by the City of Hinckley, Minnesota (the “Issuer”) of revenue obligations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the “Housing Program Act”) and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 to 469.1651 (the “Industrial Development Act”) in order to finance the cost of a project described below to be undertaken by Community Involvement Programs, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation and 501(c)(3) organization (the “Borrower”). The project consists of (i) refinancing the acquisition of an approximately 8 unit housing facility for the developmentally disabled known as the North Court Apartments which is located at 403 North Court Avenue, Sandstone, MN, (ii) refinancing the acquisition of group residential facilities for the developmentally disabled which are located at 9011 34th Street West in the City (the “St. Louis Park Facility”), 4303 North Colorado Street, Crystal, MN; 6427 Westchester Circle, Golden Valley, MN; 501 First Street SW, Hinckley, MN; 300 18th Avenue North, Hopkins, MN; 4725 Clear Spring Road and 4731 Clear Spring Road, Minnetonka, MN; 7600 48th Circle North, New Hope, MN; 7044 Columbus Avenue, Richfield, MN; and 618 South Pine Street and 112 Division Street, Sandstone, MN (iii) financing renovations to the group residential facilities located at 112 Division Street in Sandstone and 4725 Clear Spring Road in Minnetonka, and (iv) financing renovations to the corporate headquarters of the Borrower located at 1600 Broadway Street NE, Minneapolis, MN. The facility located at 403 North Court Avenue in Sandstone will be owned by North Court Apartments, the facility located at 4731 Clear Spring Road in Minnetonka will be owned by Clear Spring Road Residences, Inc. and all of the remaining facilities comprising the Project will be owned by the Borrower and the entire Project will be operated by the Borrower. The Cities of Crystal, Golden Valley, Hopkins, Minnetonka, New Hope, Richfield and Sandstone are referred to in this notice as the “Host Cities”. The total amount of the obligations to be issued presently being estimated at not to exceed $2,500,000, approximately $226,600 of which will be used for refinancing the St. Louis Park Facility. The notes or other obligations, as and when issued, will not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance upon any property of the City, the Host Cities or the Issuer, except the Project and the revenues to be derived from the Project. Such notes or obligations will not be a charge against the general credit or taxing powers of the City, the Host Cities or the Issuer, but are payable from sums to be paid by the Borrower pursuant to a revenue agreement. At the time and place fixed for the public hearing, the City Council will give all persons who appear at the hearing an opportunity to express their views with respect to the financing of the Project. Written comments will be considered if submitted at the office of the City Clerk at City Hall on or before the date of the hearing. Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4j OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA June 4, 2008--6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Michael Silver (youth member) MEMBERS ABSENT: Larry Shapiro STAFF PRESENT: Meg McMonigal, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells, Rick Birno 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of May 7, 2008 and May 21, 2008 Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to recommend approval of the May 7, 2008 and May 21, 2008 minutes. Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. 3. Hearings A. Conditional Use Permit for restaurant with liquor Location: Knollwood Mall 8100 Highway 7 Applicant: Baldomero Valenzo Case No.: 08-18-CUP Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The applicant is requesting approval of a conditional use permit to allow an existing restaurant (El Gordo) located in Knollwood Mall to serve intoxicating liquor. Commissioner Carper asked how many restaurants in Knollwood Mall serve intoxicating beverages. Mr. Morrison replied one, Applebee’s. Baldomero Valenzo, Applicant, confirmed that the only restaurant serving liquor in Knollwood Mall is Applebee’s. He said El Gordo’s food is great and offers something different from other restaurants in St. Louis Park. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4j) Page 2 Subject: Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 2008 Commissioner Kramer stated his family enjoyed the restaurant and it is hugely improved over the former owner and he would promote the restaurant. He was in favor of the conditional use permit. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Kramer made a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit for restaurant with liquor, subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. B. Conditional Use Permit for grading, fill and land reclamation Location: Fern Hill Park 4421 28th Street West Applicant: City of St. Louis Park Case No.: 08-20-CUP Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, presented the staff report. She explained the placement of fill material to reconstruct the park is to make the existing facilities more useable to residents and athletic teams who use the park by fixing drainage problems and improving the turf and hard court areas. Ms. McMonigal introduced Rick Birno, Recreation Supervisor. Commissioner Carper commented that he did not see seating for individuals in the park. Ms. McMonigal replied that benches would be placed around the walking loop. Mr. Birno added there would also be flexible seating with portable benches depending on the use of the space. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to recommend approval of the conditional use permit to allow the placement of fill material at Fern Hill Park. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4j) Page 3 Subject: Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 2008 4. Other Business A. Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance – Gun Shops Applicant: City of St. Louis Park Case No.: 08-08-ZA Ms. McMonigal noted at the last meeting the Planning Commission requested more discussion on the provisions proposed for gun shops in recently proposed zoning amendments. At that meeting staff indicated they would talk with the Police Department about some of the issues related to windows. Ms. McMonigal stated that staff was told that typically gun shops lock everything up at night in safes or secure it so there isn’t worry about breaking and entering because things would be double-locked. The visibility into the store was intended to keep a transparent operation, and the Police didn’t think it would increase the opportunity for theft. Chair Robertson stated he was the one who had raised objections to the language proposed regarding gun shops. He said by moving forward with this, they were classifying gun shops as a “sensitive use.” He asked if there is there a definition of what constitutes a sensitive use. Ms. McMonigal replied no, it was not defined in ordinance. Chair Robertson indicated that was his first big problem. He said the phrase “sensitive uses” had a negative connotation and it felt like a small business was being labeled arbitrarily without any formal criteria. He said he didn’t understand the reasons for having this before the Commission. A gun shop is a small business. He said he is a small businessman and the Chair of the Small Business Policy Committee at the State Chamber and was sensitive to government actions and the impacts on small business. He added there is only one gun store in St. Louis Park and it had been in existence for 41 years. He said he thought it was an insult to the owner to be lumped with sexually oriented businesses and pawnshops. He was a small retailer. They have stock all over the store and they don’t have a separate vault. It would be unrealistic for them to move all of their merchandise into a vault. He stated this was not well thought through. The language included a line about no car sales, which was ridiculous. He said he had a problem with the whole thing. Commissioner Morris stated the concept was brought in under the pawn shop land use and that pawn shops in some areas, not operating in St. Louis Park, would accept pawned guns and resell them with a Federal license. The proposed language seemed to narrow it down as a gun shop as a place that sells guns, but Target stores could sell guns. It was a matter of corporate policies. Costco and Sam’s Club sell firearms. This was to lump anybody that sells firearms under a Federal permit, into these conditions, not specifically an independent gun shop owner. The Police response was unless they find out somehow, they don’t know of any Federal permits to sell firearms and aren’t notified of that. Commissioner Morris asked how the City regulates sale of firearms. He asked if there is there a special permit. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4j) Page 4 Subject: Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 2008 Ms. McMonigal replied there isn’t a special permit. The City licenses certain businesses, not gun sales. This would require a conditional use permit for firearms sales. Any new land use has to come to the Zoning Department and get a registration of the land use to show that their land use is approved in the zoning district. There isn’t any other notification by the Federal government to the police or anyone else that guns would be sold. This was an extra step, an extra permit to take a closer look at the land use in the area and make sure it met all of the distance requirements proposed here. There would have to be a hearing notifying property owners within 350 feet. Chair Robertson stated that the large retailers need conditional use permits because of their size and the large volumes of traffic that have impact on the surrounding neighborhood. They don’t need a conditional use permit because of what they sell. He said his concern was including small gun shops into this ordinance by labeling them as a “sensitive” use. He said he didn’t understand why these uses should have 1,000 feet between them. Ms. McMonigal stated when staff passed the revisions to requiring pawnshops to have a conditional use permit, the ordinance included that pawn shops must be 1,000 feet from another pawn shop, currency exchange, payday loan agency, gun shop, liquor store, and sexually oriented business. They were requested by the City Council to do the opposite as well and make sure those businesses also had the 1,000 foot distance requirement. The idea is that buying and selling guns is a sensitive use in the City. Chair Robertson stated that zoning ordinance doesn’t define sensitive uses. Pawnshops are a different kind of business. A gun shop was just small retail. He said “sensitive uses” should have been questioned before. He asked the reason for having 1,000 feet between a pawnshop and a gun shop. A gun can’t be purchased without a two-week waiting period. He said he saw it as unnecessary restriction of a small business. The existing gun shop had been operating 41 years without a problem. Commissioner Morris asked if any big box retailer, or an existing business under a conditional use permit, would need a second conditional use permit because they wanted to sell sporting shot guns. Ms. McMonigal replied if they have an existing permit, they would need an amendment. If they didn’t have a permit, they would have to get a conditional use permit. Commissioner Morris asked if any future sales of firearms requiring a conditional use permit or an amendment to an existing one would now make it more of a public debate issue as to whether communities want that store to be selling firearms or not. Ms. McMonigal replied the City has permitted uses, accessory uses, permitted with conditions and conditional uses. Conditional uses require, by State law, a public hearing notification of property owners within 350 feet and need to meet conditions in the Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4j) Page 5 Subject: Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 2008 ordinance. The City can impose additional conditions to mitigate impacts on the neighborhood. Those conditions need to be reasonable and related to the use. The intent is to have the use looked at more closely so they can look at specific neighborhood impacts and place additional conditions if necessary. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the current gun shop met the requirements of this ordinance. Ms. McMonigal replied staff hadn’t looked at that closely, it would be grandfathered in. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if they should send this back to Council and ask them in a study session to decide if they meant for gun shops to be included in this. She asked if the intent was clear. Ms. McMonigal replied that she thought the Council’s intent was clear, which was to require a 1,000 foot distance among the uses. Chair Kramer suggested the Council could clarify their objectives, rather than asking the Planning Commission to include something that some of them weren’t getting. He said that Commissioner Robertson had concerns about the window issue at the last meeting, but he was seeing now that Commissioner Robertson had concerns about all of the proposed language. Commissioner Kramer said he was concerned about safety and security. He said he didn’t like the window part of it, but maybe if bollards could be allowed that would be more acceptable to him. Commissioner Robertson stated he had problems with the entire amendment. As he looked at the particulars, it felt like the comments about windows were not thought through. The existing gun shop is within 350 feet of residential. It has windows with bars and grills inside and out. The whole building is built like a fortress. They need that to prevent smash and grab. It doesn’t comply with the proposed language. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated they would be grandfathered in. Commissioner Robertson asked if the existing shop wanted to expand or sell, would the new owner need to come up to these standards? Ms. McMonigal replied it wouldn’t be based on a change of ownership, as CUPs run with the land; they could continue to operate. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated the current owner is grandfathered in, he sells his business to someone else and they can continue. The proposed language would be for any new business or a place such as Target that wanted to sell guns. She said she didn’t have a problem with that, but did have a problem with the window aspect. Common sense says the shop needs to lock it down and bar the windows. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4j) Page 6 Subject: Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 2008 Ms. McMonigal reiterated that the Police said it was not very easy to do a smash and grab at a gun store. Gun store owners take many precautions that keep the guns under advanced security. The Police are not concerned that barred windows are needed. Commissioner Robertson stated they had bars and grills on windows for many years because they work. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if anyone thought it was a good policy to put guns stores into the sensitive use category. She asked if the window aspect should be modified. She asked if it should be sent back to the City Council for clarification. Commissioner Robertson said he thought a good definition of sensitive uses should be written. He was not comfortable putting a label on any kind of business arbitrarily. Chair Kramer was bothered by the discussion if it only effected one owner. It would be grandfathered in or it could be sold. Commissioner Person asked if Council could consider this with or without Planning Commission recommendation. Ms. McMonigal replied it could be moved forward to the City Council. It was preferable that the Planning Commission make a recommendation one way or another. The Commission could change the proposed conditions and suggest something else. Commissioner Morris would like to see some thought given to the use and the phrasing of “gun store” or “gun shop.” That doesn’t seem to include accessory sales of firearms. Fireworks are sold in Costco. He didn’t think fireworks sales as an accessory use required a conditional use permit. This seemed to be implying that firearm sales were more dangerous than other things like liquor or sexually oriented businesses. A problem in St. Louis Park had not been experienced. It arose out of the fact that a pawn shop may want to sell firearms. The issue should be expanded as to what is allowed for the sale of firearms and possibly even fireworks in the City of St. Louis Park. Commissioner Robertson said he agreed. He commented that there is no ordinance for distance between a liquor store and auto dealer, yet liquor and automobiles cause many more accidents than liquor and guns, although liquor and guns account for 97% of gun injuries. There was flawed logic. He was hoping to step back on this and focus on sensitive uses and what that is. Commissioner Carper said he agreed with the Chair and his position. He felt this was discriminatory on a particular type of retail and that the structure of what was proposed was flawed and needed to be revisited entirely. He understood the pawnshop provisions but felt a gun shop should be treated as retail. He said he was opposed to the proposed language regarding gun shops. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4j) Page 7 Subject: Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 2008 Commissioner Kramer made a motion to recommend denial. Commissioner Morris suggesting taking it under issue with a study session by the Planning Commission or with the City Council rather than having no further input from the Planning Commission. Commissioner Kramer withdrew his motion to recommend denial. Chair Kramer said he felt the Commission should consider this further with more guidance and clarification from the City Council. Commissioner Morris made a motion to postpone the item indefinitely or until a study session is convened. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5- 1 (Commissioner Person voted no). When asked about timing, Ms. McMonigal stated if the Planning Commission gives no recommendation to City Council within 60 days, the City Council may take action without a Planning Commission recommendation. 5. Communications Ms. McMonigal asked which Commissioners would be able to attend the July 2nd meeting. All Commissioners with the exception of Johnston-Madison and Kramer would be attending. Additional zoning amendments will be coming forward. Commissioner Person asked how work on the Comp Plan revision was going. Ms. McMonigal replied it was happening a little more slowly than she hoped. Staff would be bringing more items to Planning Commission soon. Neighborhood meetings will be scheduled soon. Commissioner Morris said there had been times when the Planning Commission met on Saturdays to review Comp Plan revisions, which seemed to work well. Ms. McMonigal said summer schedules were difficult. Perhaps fall would be better. Staff continues to work on the park plan, sidewalks and trails plan, and utilities background. A discussion was held on when to meet on Comp Plan items. Commissioners agreed to meet for study sessions if time allowed after regular meetings. Commissioner Person asked Ms. McMonigal to create a tentative study session schedule. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4j) Page 8 Subject: Planning Commission Minutes June 4, 2008 Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked when the zoning changes from the Planning Commission meeting of May 21st were going to City Council. Ms. McMonigal responded those items would go to the Council on June 16th. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned 6:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 4k Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Vendor Claims. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to accept for filing Vendor Claims for the period June 14, 2008 through July 3, 2008. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. BACKGROUND: The Finance Department prepares this report on a monthly basis for Council’s review. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Attachments: Vendor Claims Prepared by: Connie Neubeck, Account Clerk 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 1Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 175.00POLICE G & A TRAININGA&S TRAINING LLC 175.00 123.52TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESA-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC 123.52 1,437.67BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BUILDING MTCE SERVICEA-OK EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY CO 1,437.67 59.71WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESAAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT 59.71 7,640.86EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTAAA-LICENSE DIVISION 7,640.86 30,000.00FINANCE G & A AUDITING AND ACCOUNTING SERVICABDO EICK & MEYERS LLP 30,000.00 15.20TV PRODUCTION RENTAL EQUIPMENTABLE COURIER 15.20 103.65GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY INC 103.65 305.80YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIESALL STAR SPORTS 305.80 1,550.00PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEAMERICAN TEST CENTER INC 1,550.00 38.82HUMAN RESOURCES CITEAMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER 122.72GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 219.03PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 159.75PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 146.30ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 94.38VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 122.20WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 122.18SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,025.38 923.05PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIESANCHOR PAPER CO 923.05 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 2 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 2Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 121.56POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC 9.00POLICE G & A POSTAGE 130.56 2,017.12TRAFFIC CONTROL OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESANDERSEN INC, EARL 1,107.39FABRICATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 3,124.51 30.00POLICE G & A TRAININGANNANDALE, CITY OF 30.00 90.00RENTAL / BIRTHDAY PARTY RENT REVENUEANTHONY MIDDLE SCHOOL 90.00 486.92PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESAPACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA 1,032.20ENTERPRISE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,519.12 137.50PUBLIC WORKS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSAPWA REGISTRATION 137.50PUBLIC WORKS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 137.50ENGINEERING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 137.50ENGINEERING G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 275.00PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 137.50WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 962.50 529.54GENERAL CUSTODIAL DUTIES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLYARAMARK UNIFORM CORP ACCTS 529.54 5,371.76WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIAUTOMATIC SYSTEMS INC 5,371.75SEWER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 1,895.91STORM WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 12,639.42 26.00HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESBARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD 26.00 7,703.49CE INSPECTION IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIBARR ENGINEERING CO 7,703.49 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 3 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 3Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 229.50GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSBATTERIES PLUS 229.50 50.00SUPPORT SERVICES TRAININGBCA - BTS 50.00 948.66WATER UTILITY G&A OTHERBEC CORPORATION 948.66 336.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBERG, STEVE 336.00 37.26POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESBIKEMASTERS 37.26 500.00NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESBLACKSTONE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN 500.00 3,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWBLOOM, JUDY 3,000.00 220.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEBOHN WELDING INC 220.00 50.00ADULT PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEBOLL, CASSANDRA 50.00 301.50WATER UTILITY BUDGET FISCAL AGENT FEESBOND TRUST SERVICES CORP 148.50STORM WATER REV BOND G & A FISCAL AGENT FEES 450.00 10.00PICNIC SHELTERS RENT REVENUEBORLOZ, SHIRLEY 10.00 256.11GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSBOYER TRUCK PARTS 256.11 3,834.86GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEBOYER TRUCKS LAUDERDALE 3,834.86 19.77GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSBRAKE & EQUIPMENT WAREHOUSE IN 19.77 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 4 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 4Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,107.60PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESBRENTS SIGNS AND DISPLAYS 210.34ENVIRONMENTAL G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,317.94 120.00SOLID WASTE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSBRINK, SCOTT 120.00 47.00ASSESSING G & A MEETING EXPENSEBULTEMA, CORY 246.95ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 293.95 311.00EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTCAB SOLUTIONS LLC 311.00 705.00OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONSCALHOUN TOWERS APTS 705.00 9,743.76ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICESCAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC 157.50EXCESS PUBLIC LAND LEGAL SERVICES 4,932.63WIRELESS G & A LEGAL SERVICES 14,833.89 132.38WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSESCANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY 132.38 438.34PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES RENTAL EQUIPMENTCANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 438.34 29,824.08EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTCAR/TRUCK CITY 29,824.08 3,317.52DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICECARTRIDGE CARE 3,317.52 414.97GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSCATCO PARTS SERVICE 414.97 10,893.31DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENTCDW GOVERNMENT INC 10,893.31 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 5 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 5Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,310.64FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GASCENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN 11,723.79ENTERPRISE G & A HEATING GAS 13,034.43 8,358.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S OTHER RETIREMENTCENTRAL PENSION FUND 8,358.00 7,000.00CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDICHAMPION COATINGS 7,000.00 500.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCHRISTIAN, PAUL 500.00 351.25NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCIMA COMPANIES 351.25 67.20WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESCINTAS FIRST AID & SAFETY 67.20 65.31-GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSCITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK 503.88ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 267.00ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 46.97ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE 22.80HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES 151.69HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 200.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 144.00HUMAN RESOURCES CITE 125.84HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE 8.51IT G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 49.90APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICE SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 171.53NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES 287.72NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENT .53NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 62.36ASSESSING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 327.99FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1,416.91COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING 920.06SPECIAL PROJECTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 187.39POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 69.38POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES 305.10POLICE G & A TRAINING 132.50DARE PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 6 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 6Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 78.40SUPPORT SERVICES TRAINING 181.50SUPPORT SERVICES SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 181.50SUPERVISORYSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 181.50PATROLSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 4.58ANIMAL CONTROL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 41.99OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 67.40OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,205.71OPERATIONSTRAINING 63.58INSPECTIONS G & A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 398.98ENGINEERING G & A MEETING EXPENSE 25.27ENGINEERING G & A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 7.71-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 525.00ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING 488.06ORGANIZED REC G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 65.14ORGANIZED REC G & A MEETING EXPENSE 42.62KICKBALLGENERAL SUPPLIES 19.56KICKBALLMEETING EXPENSE 21.31SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 25.24SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 288.07SUMMER FIELDTRIPS GENERAL SUPPLIES 34.02YOUTH TENNIS GENERAL SUPPLIES 52.10PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 508.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING 73.39ENVIRONMENTAL G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 143.40WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 74.21BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 676.61AQUATIC PARK BUDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES 479.48VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SMALL TOOLS 23.73VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MOTOR FUELS 252.00WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 468.39WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 64.55-EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT B/S DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 1,249.12EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 13,204.35 2,500.00COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGCITY IMAGE COMMUNICATIONS 2,500.00 2,646.47WIRELESS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOLUMBIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS CO 2,646.47 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 7 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 7Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 149.95NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES DATACOMMUNICATIONSCOMCAST 149.95 528.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESCOX, BARB 528.00 155.58POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESCUB FOODS 69.38POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES 4.58ANIMAL CONTROL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 229.54 516.26BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESCUMMINS NPOWER LLC 302.82SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 819.08 3,183.39SSD 1 G&A LANDSCAPING MATERIALSCUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES 12,277.59SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,394.11SSD 2 G&A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 7,602.23SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,214.01SSD 3 G&A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 5,082.18SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 31,753.51 2,177.52WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESDAKOTA SUPPLY GROUP 1,330.00WATER UTILITY G&A MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE 3,507.52 762.55POLICE G & A RENTAL EQUIPMENTDELAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SERVIC 762.55 388.03SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESDJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC 1,611.46CE INSPECTION IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 452.55UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 2,452.04 762.93POSTAL SERVICES POSTAGEDO-GOOD.BIZ INC 762.93 285.15BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALSDUNDEE NURSERY 285.15 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 8 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 8Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 275.54ELECTRICAL SYSTEM MTCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEDYMANYK ELECTRIC INC 275.54 500.00NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESELIOT VIEW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN 500.00 54,285.99EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTELK RIVER CHRYSLER INC 54,285.99 691.19SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY 1,449.24SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER 2,140.43 94.46OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIESEMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS 94.46 205.90WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERSENGELKES, CAROL 205.90 23,058.13SAMPLINGGENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESENSR CORPORATION 4,375.00STUDIESGENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 27,433.13 428.82GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSENVIRONMENTAL EQUIPMENT & SERV 428.82 20.76PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTSFACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO 243.18GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTS 263.94 295.00AQUATIC PARK BUDGET ADVERTISINGFAMILY TIMES INC 295.00 110.64POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESFASTENAL COMPANY 285.26INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 37.89PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 37.89BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 471.68 1,750.00OPERATIONSGENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESFISCHLER & ASSOCIATES PA 1,750.00 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 9 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 9Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 51.12VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIESFLOYD TOTAL SECURITY 51.12 35.00RENTAL / BIRTHDAY PARTY RENT REVENUEFOULKES, SARAH 35.00 20.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATFREMDER, MARK 20.00 9,800.25WOLFE PARK AMPHITHEATER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESFRIEDGES LANDSCAPING INC 9,800.25 12,500.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INSURANCE PAYABLEGALLAGHER RISK MGMT SERVICES I 12,500.00 2,500.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWGALLOP SOLUTIONS INC 2,500.00 149.75PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIESGAME TIME 149.75 134.98SUPERVISORYSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATGARLAND, MIKAEL 134.98 8,523.41ARENA MAINTENANCE MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTGARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC 8,523.41 1,311.27BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEGENERAL PARTS INC 316.00CONCESSIONSEQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,627.27 552.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGHIZONI, DAVE 552.00 152.04GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESGOLDEN VALLEY SUPPLY COMPANY 152.04 352.50ASSET MANAGEMENT GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESGOODPOINTE TECHNOLOGY CORP 352.50 1,273.05WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC 1,273.05 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 10 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 10Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,021.98ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATGOTHBERG, BRIDGET 1,021.98 21.31GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESGRAINGER INC, WW 21.31 2,309.60DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESGRANITE LEDGE ELECTRICAL CONTR 3,065.00INSTALLATIONOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,374.60 600.00APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICE COMPUTER SERVICESGREEN, HOWARD R COMPANY 600.00 54.66PATROLSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATGRONSKI, PAM 54.66 4,940.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEGROTH SEWER & WATER 4,940.00 5,408.08TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEHAINES TREE SERVICE, B J 5,408.08 384.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHAMILTON, MIKE 384.00 35.00RENTAL / BIRTHDAY PARTY RENT REVENUEHAMMERSTEN, LINDA 35.00 4,434.75AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHAWKINS INC 8,071.43WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,268.24WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER 13,774.42 2,314.69ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESHEDBERG AGGREGATES 95.36STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 2,410.05 36.64WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESHEGNA, JESSICA 36.64 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 11 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 11Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 550.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHELGESON, GLEN 550.00 336.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHENDERSON, TRACY 336.00 258.00SUPERVISORYTRAININGHENDON PUBLISHING COMPANY 258.00 382.24NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES COMPUTER SERVICESHENNEPIN COUNTY INFO TECH 1,689.76POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,245.84OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS 3,317.84 944.66POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFFS ACCTG 944.66 1,503.00POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SERVICEHENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 1,503.00 2,000.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENTHENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE 2,000.00 29.33DAMAGE REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESHIGHWAY TECHNOLOGIES INC 29.33 245.00NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHILLMAN, LAURA 245.00 156.10GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 12.76PATCHING-PERMANENT SMALL TOOLS 69.19CRACK SEALING PROJECTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 95.81ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS 30.19DAMAGE REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 93.59RELAMPINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 10.62PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 53.06PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 31.92PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 234.81PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN SMALL TOOLS 65.84SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 11.64-OUTREACH GENERAL SUPPLIES Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 12 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 12Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 134.88BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 410.90WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 128.99WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 69.00SEWER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 1,586.02 39.94POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESHOME DEPOT CREDIT SRVCS 7.93ANIMAL CONTROL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 47.87 21.14GRAFFITI CONTROL OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESHOME HARDWARE 13.26DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 25.71UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 60.11 176.00VOLLEYBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESHOWES, KRISTINE 96.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 272.00 12.79POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESHSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS 12.79 800.00PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEI-STATE TRUCK CENTER 800.00 1,495.50EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESI.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 1,495.50 120.00SUPERVISORYSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSIACP 120.00 12.19-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSICE SKATING INST AMERICA 199.80INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 187.61 41.34PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESICI DULUX PAINT CENTERS 41.34 463.28WESTWOOD G & A RENTAL EQUIPMENTIKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 4,500.00EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 4,963.28 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 13 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 13Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,154.95CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESIMPLEX.NET INC 1,154.95 260.93GROUNDS MTCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSINDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO 260.93 2,735.54CITY HALL GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESINSPEC INC 2,735.54 308.64GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSINTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM OF M 308.64 300.00TRAININGTRAININGINTL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINE 450.00WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING 450.00SEWER UTILITY G&A TRAINING 1,200.00 225.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATINVER GROVE FORD 225.00GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTS 450.00 235.62ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESIRON MOUNTAIN 235.62 440.00NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESISD #283 440.00 56.91POLICE G & A RENTAL OTHERJ & F REDDY RENTS 34.40BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 77.04WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 168.35 443.69NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESJEWELL, JILL 100.00NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT PUBLIC LIABILITY INSURANCE 543.69 115.58BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESJOHN HENRY FOSTER MN 115.58 60.00YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEJOHNSON, MICHELLE 60.00 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 14 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 14Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 276.00KICKBALLOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESJOHNSON, SUSAN 276.00 512.50PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE LUBRICANTS/ADDITIVESKATH FUEL OIL SERVICE 512.50 1,800.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKRECH, O'BRIEN, MUELLER & WASS 1,800.00 500.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESKROOG, RACHAEL 500.00 316,992.20CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDILACHMANSINGH SALES INC, CARLO 316,992.20 20,774.96EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTLANO EQUIPMENT INC 20,774.96 898.10RELAMPINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESLARSON, JH CO 1,587.67SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 2,485.77 329.62-PARK IMPROVE BALANCE SHEET DUE TO OTHER GOVTSLAUREL TREE FARMS 8,114.62TREE REPLACEMENT TREE REPLACEMENT 7,785.00 2,339.82EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESLAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES 2,339.82 58.60GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESLAWSON PRODUCTS INC 58.60 2,729.00ADMINISTRATION G & A PUBLIC OFFIC LIAB INSURANCELEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE 140,126.50UNINSURED LOSS B/S PREPAID EXPENSES 2,176.37UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 145,031.87 718.35PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESLEGEND TECHNICAL SERVICES 718.35 1,224.71EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A TUITIONLINDBLOM, MIKE 1,224.71 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 15 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 15Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 43.20YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUELINDGREN, JAYDEE 43.20 38,200.08APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICE COMPUTER SERVICESLOGIS 1,679.00NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES COMPUTER SERVICES 302.46E-GOVERNMENT SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENT 12,729.29APPLICATION SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENT 52,910.83 100.50ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CARLOMBARDI, JIM 100.50 120.00TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATM A C T A 120.00 205.00ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSEMACKENZIE & FRIENDS, INC 205.00 947.10SWEEPINGEQUIPMENT PARTSMACQUEEN EQUIP CO 947.10 90.75WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEMANAGED SERVICES INC 90.75 1,140.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMCBRIDE, STEPHEN 1,140.00 27.86SCHOOL GROUPS GENERAL SUPPLIESMCCONNELL, BECKY 27.86 295.44PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESMCCOY, WILLIAM PETROLEUM FUELS 295.44 53,827.66MUNICIPAL BUILDING G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIMEGGITT TRAINING SYSTEMS INC 53,827.66 13,000.00HOLIDAY PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMELROSE NORTH PYROTECHNICS INC 13,000.00 53.02GRAFFITI CONTROL OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESMENARDS Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 16 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 16Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 731.92WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 784.94 20.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATMERKLEY, SCOTT 2.00TRAININGMEETING EXPENSE 22.00 294,271.77OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICEMETROPOLITAN COUNCIL 294,271.77 106.64POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENTMICRO CENTER 19.99POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 126.63 907.86PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESMIDWEST ASPHALT CORP 324,453.13CONSTRUCTION PAYMENTS IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 325,360.99 660.30OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIESMIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO 660.30 1,932.20CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIESMIDWEST COCA-COLA BTLG 1,932.20 30,393.10VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MOTOR FUELSMIDWEST FUELS INVER GROVE HEIG 30,393.10 475.01EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITSMINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOC 475.01 2,223.51EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S WAGE GARNISHMENTSMINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CT 2,223.51 197.93NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMINNESOTA CLAY CO USA 197.93 806.31GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEMINNESOTA CONWAY 329.60SEWER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,135.91 344.00SUPERVISORYTRAININGMINNESOTA HIGHWAY SAFETY & RES Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 17 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 17Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,032.00PATROLTRAINING 1,376.00 16.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S ACCRUED OTHER BENEFITSMINNESOTA NCPERS LIFE INS 16.00 25.00WESTWOOD G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSMINNESOTA ORNITHOLOGISTS' UNIO 25.00 38.60PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESMINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY 38.60 2,255.10PRINTING/REPRO SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIESMINUTEMAN PRESS 2,255.10 117.67GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSMTI DISTRIBUTING CO 117.67 255.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESMVTL LABORATORIES 255.00 124.43GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIESMYERS TIRE SUPPLY CO 124.43 82.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESNANCY'S CRAFT CAPERS 82.00 11.48OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIESNAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO) 5.63VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 440.70VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SMALL TOOLS 79.77PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 239.00PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 39.39GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 102.67GENERAL REPAIR SMALL TOOLS 496.22GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,414.86 3,666.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSNATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES 3,666.00 126.00PUBLIC WORKS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSNATL NOTARY ASSOC 126.00 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 18 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 18Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 15,276.04SEWER UTILITY G&A REPLACEMENTSNEENAH FOUNDREY 1,877.81STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 17,153.85 74.75HUMAN RESOURCES TELEPHONENEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 165.80EDA / HA REIMBURSEMENT TELEPHONE 1,046.97POLICE G & A TELEPHONE 501.97OPERATIONSTELEPHONE 261.97ENGINEERING G & A TELEPHONE 441.00PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TELEPHONE 101.53PARK AND REC G&A TELEPHONE 419.93ORGANIZED REC G & A TELEPHONE 324.59PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TELEPHONE 129.63ENVIRONMENTAL G & A TELEPHONE 295.87WESTWOOD G & A TELEPHONE 74.75REC CENTER/AQUATIC PARK SAL TELEPHONE 156.67VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A TELEPHONE 381.60WATER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 195.18SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 21.29EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 4,593.50 110.12BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESNORTHERN AIRE SWIMMING POOLS 24.53AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 134.65 18,499.64WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESNORTHERN WATER WORKS SUPPLY 18,499.64 8,658.45WATER UTILITY G&A OTHERNORTHWESTERN POWER EQUIPMENT C 8,658.45 390.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATNRPA REGISTRATION C/O EPIC 390.00 174.20ENGINEERING G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICEOCE 174.20 104.54WESTWOOD G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAROESTREICH, MARK 104.54 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 19 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 19Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 96.30ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIESOFFICE DEPOT 487.35ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 265.72IT G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 23.86ASSESSING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 74.55FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 61.46GENERAL INFORMATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 198.15POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 14.79POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 28.67OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES 117.61INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 44.21PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 319.36ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 68.16PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 100.75VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 6.59HOUSING REHAB G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,907.53 131.85NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES DATACOMMUNICATIONSOFFICE OF ENTERPRISE TECHNOLOG 62.86VOICE SYSTEM MTCE TELEPHONE 4,131.95FACILITY OPERATIONS TELEPHONE 99.57NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH TELEPHONE 746.74COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONE 5,172.97 2,128.50INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESOFFICE TEAM 2,128.50 217.60TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESOLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC 217.60 20.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTATOLSON, JIM 2.00TRAININGMEETING EXPENSE 22.00 1,440.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESOLUFSON, CURTIS 1,440.00 86.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPSOMAN, JEFF 86.00 3,228.27PORTABLE TOILETS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESON SITE SANITATION Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 20 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 20Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 133.12WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 63.90SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 3,425.29 8,228.40COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHINGPERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC 1,280.00SOLID WASTE G&A ADVERTISING 1,140.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ADVERTISING 10,648.40 8,955.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESPETERSON, BRENT 8,955.00 .10GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNTPETTY CASH 8.52ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 20.20ADMINISTRATION G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 8.67HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES 37.76HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE 4.04FINANCE G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 25.96POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE 5.50CLERICALTRAVEL/MEETINGS 8.59SUPPORT SERVICES TRAINING 3.00ERUTRAINING 59.95INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 36.29INSPECTIONS G & A MEETING EXPENSE 9.00TRAININGMEETING EXPENSE 8.25TRAININGMEETING EXPENSE 8.75WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 49.62WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12.00WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 21.50WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES 327.70 80.07WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESPETTY CASH - WWNC 6.50SCHOOL GROUPS GENERAL SUPPLIES 86.57 222.53GROUNDS MTCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSPHILIP'S TREE CARE INC 101.76PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 346.13WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 85.32BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 755.74 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 21 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 21Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 47.80PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIESPLAYPOWER LT FARMINGTON INC 47.80 39.34JUNIOR NATURALISTS GENERAL SUPPLIESPOPE, DREW 39.34 3,900.00COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGEPOSTMASTER - PERMIT #603 459.57WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 459.57SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 459.57SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE 459.56STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 5,738.27 5,410.37PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDIPROGRESSIVE CONSULTING ENGINEE 5,410.37 60,509.69WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICEQUALITY RESTORATION SERVICES I 60,509.69 27.13VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A POSTAGEQUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER 27.13 55.22NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH TELEPHONEQWEST 110.44COP SHOP TELEPHONE 1,396.84COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONE 18.12E-911 PROGRAM TELEPHONE 22.36REC CENTER BUILDING TELEPHONE 1,602.98 36.20SPECIAL EVENTS GENERAL SUPPLIESRADIO SHACK CORP 36.20 15,773.55TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICERAINBOW TREE CARE 7,893.25TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 23,666.80 281.35NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRAINER, LYNNE 281.35 1,781.95FACILITY OPERATIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICERANDY'S SANITATION INC 775.61REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 22 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 22Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 76.28WATER UTILITY G&A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 588.79SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 3,222.63 600.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRANGLE, KICO 600.00 128.60WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGERAPID GRAPHICS & MAILING 128.60SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 128.60SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS POSTAGE 128.60STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 514.40 25,364.04SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS OTHERREHRIG PACIFIC CO 25,364.04 118.22WIRELESS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRICHTER, JERRY 118.22 2,981.04WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESRMR SERVICES 2,981.04 779.48GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSRMS RENTALS 779.48 130.00ENVIRONMENTAL G & A TRAININGROCHESTER ARBORIST WORKSHOP 130.00 1,689.41WATER UTILITY G&A SPECIAL ASSESSMENTSRUSS, MARCY 1,689.41 427.22STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICESA-AG INC 427.22 486.62GENERAL REPAIR TIRESSAMARITAN TIRE CO 486.62 254.38PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESSCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO. 254.38 128.66WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLSSEARS COMMERCIAL ONE 128.66 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 23 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 23Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,564.47PE INVEST/REVIEW/PER IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDISEH 308.00STORM WATER UTILITY BUDGET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,872.47 150.00OPERATIONSTRAININGSHERBURNE COUNTY AUDITOR-TREAS 150.00 283.13GRAFFITI CONTROL OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESSHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO 2,808.42PAINTINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 3,091.55 1,263.84CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIESSIMON DELIVERS INC 1,263.84 392.33GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSSIWEK LUMBER & MILLWORK INC 392.33 3,056.00GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CHECKINGSKALLET, DAVID 3,056.00 1,318.01EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNION DUESSLP ASSOC OF FIREFIGHTERS #993 1,318.01 1,300.00HOLIDAY PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESSMP PRODUCTIONS 1,300.00 5,421.00GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICESONUS INTERIORS INC 5,421.00 159.49ADMINISTRATION G & A TELEPHONESPRINT 53.89COMM & MARKETING G & A TELEPHONE 290.60RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT TELEPHONE 101.66FINANCE G & A TELEPHONE 265.04POLICE G & A TELEPHONE 50.83INSPECTIONS G & A TELEPHONE 921.51 2,756.48WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESSPS COMPANIES INC 2,756.48 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 24 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 24Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 4,630.21ENGINEERING G & A ENGINEERING SERVICESSRF CONSULTING GROUP INC 1,144.11PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,919.73PE DESIGN IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 2,209.69CE INSPECTION IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 10,903.74 13,281.46PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESST CROIX REC CO 13,281.46 500.00GENERAL FUND G&A CONTRIBUTIONS/DONATIONSST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY BAND 500.00 2,000.00NEIGHBORHOOD PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESST LOUIS PARK FRIENDS OF THE A 2,000.00 15,266.88TRAILS PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESST LOUIS PARK HOUSING AUTHORIT 15,266.88 62.92ADMINISTRATION G & A LONG TERM DISABILITYSTANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY, TH 55.19HUMAN RESOURCES LONG TERM DISABILITY 15.76COMM & MARKETING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 43.35IT G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 19.89ASSESSING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 73.25FINANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 114.67COMM DEV G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 18.17FACILITIES MCTE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 125.46POLICE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 79.69OPERATIONSLONG TERM DISABILITY 77.18INSPECTIONS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 45.37PUBLIC WORKS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 58.05ENGINEERING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 21.18PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 85.00ORGANIZED REC G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 21.18PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 17.66ENVIRONMENTAL G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 17.66WESTWOOD G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 18.67REC CENTER/AQUATIC PARK SAL LONG TERM DISABILITY 18.17VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 17.16HOUSING REHAB G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 21.18WATER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 2,249.57EMPLOYEE FLEX SPEND G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 3,276.38 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 25 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 25Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 336.76BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIESSTATE SUPPLY CO 336.76 2,473.90SPECIAL EVENTS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESSTITCHIN POST 1,296.79SUMMER PLAYGROUNDS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 811.08EVENING T-BALL/BASEBALL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,331.90SOCCEROPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 247.08AQUATIC PARK G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 6,160.75 76.50SUMMER GRADE 2, 3 GENERAL SUPPLIESSTOLPMAN, PREETHI 76.50 108.63SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICESTRAND MFG CO 108.63 2,845.42BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESSTRATEGIC EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY C 2,845.42 69.21EQUIPMENT REPLACE G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENTSTREICHER'S 69.21 1,165.00NETWORK SUPPORT/SERVICES OFFICE EQUIPMENTSTRUCTURED NETWORK SOLUTIONS 1,165.00 231.63GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSSUBURBAN CHEVROLET 231.63 155.25VOICE SYSTEM MTCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICESUMMIT FINANCIAL RESOURCES LP 155.25 5.53-PARK AND RECREATION BALANCE SH DUE TO OTHER GOVTSSUMMIT SUPPLY CORP OF COLORADO 90.53PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIES 85.00 303.89ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICESSUN NEWSPAPERS 92.95PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 377.60SOLID WASTE G&A ADVERTISING 774.44 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 26 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 26Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 1,344.95IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTALBERG LAWN & LANDSCAPE INC 902.68MOWINGOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,247.63 15.93-POLICE G & A SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIESTARGET BANK 4.19POLICE G & A TRAINING 68.01NEIGHBORHOOD OUTREACH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES .77ANIMAL CONTROL OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 21.43WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 78.47 422.75AQUATIC PARK BUDGET PROGRAM REVENUETEENS ALONE 422.75 38.70ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTELELANGUAGE INC 38.70 97.00BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICETERMINIX INT 106.65WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 203.65 9,800.00SAMPLINGOTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTESTAMERICA LABORATORIES INC 9,800.00 31.96INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESTILTON, JOHN 189.21INSPECTIONS G & A TRAINING 221.17 366.00ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL 366.00 1,789.35CE INSPECTION IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDITKDA 1,789.35 2,236.50TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICETOP NOTCH TREE CARE 2,236.50 500.00UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSSTOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC 500.00 2,000.00PERFORMING ARTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAILER TRASH 2,000.00 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 27 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 27Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 240.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESTRAUTMANN, JOHN 240.00 3,325.00DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICESTRESERA CONSULTING LLC 3,325.00 1,092.60SWEEPINGEQUIPMENT PARTSTRI STATE BOBCAT 138.75DAMAGE REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTS 857.01GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,586.41-GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 501.95 83.19GROUNDS MTCE LANDSCAPING MATERIALSTRUGREEN CHEMLAWN 83.19 6.40BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIESTWIN CITY HARDWARE 6.40 1,594.88H.V.A.C. EQUIP. MTCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICEUHL CO INC 1,594.88 5,000.00ESCROWSPMC ESCROWUNITED PROPERTIES 5,000.00 489.00EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S UNITED WAYUNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA 489.00 14,975.00WIRELESS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESUNPLUGGED CITIES LLC 14,975.00 29.03NETWORK SUPPORT SERVICES TELEPHONEUSA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC 74.64POLICE G & A TELEPHONE 103.67 1,505.44DESKTOP SUPPORT/SERVICES DATACOMMUNICATIONSVERIZON WIRELESS 244.73POLICE G & A TELEPHONE 24.17COMMUNICATIONS/GV REIMBURSEABL TELEPHONE 1,774.34 288.00ADULT SOFTBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESVESTAL, MICHAEL 288.00 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 28 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 28Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 687.90WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIESVIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR 687.90 742.73RELAMPINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIESVOSS LIGHTING 742.73 366.11GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT PARTSWALSER CHRYSLER JEEP 366.11 67,587.36SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICEWASTE MANAGEMENT 32,213.40SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS RECYCLING SERVICE 14,830.32SOLID WASTE COLLECTIONS YARD WASTE SERVICE 27,321.84SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 17,914.89SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL YARD WASTE SERVICE 159,867.81 222.50PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICESWASTE TECHNOLOGY INC 437.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 659.50 5,957.49CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIESWATSON CO INC 5,957.49 65.00YOUTH PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUEWEALER, LORI 65.00 4,870.85WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICEWEBER ELECTRIC 4,870.85 37.88WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICEWERNER ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO 37.88 1,646.68INSPECTIONS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIESWILLIAMS SCOTSMAN INC 1,646.68 31.72OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIESWINDSCHITL, MARK 31.72 597.53EMPLOYEE FLEXIBLE SPENDING B/S STATE WITHHOLDINGWISCONSIN DEPT OF REVENUE 597.53 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 29 07/02/2008CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:47:41R55CKSUM LOG23000VO 29Page -Council Check Summary 07/03/2008 -06/14/2008 Vendor AmountBusiness Unit Object 20.22OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICEXCEL ENERGY 23,383.38PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 4,779.47PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 17.80BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE 46.25WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE 313.39WESTWOOD G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 26,182.44OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICE 1,354.54OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICE 2,879.59OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICE 1,443.44OPERATIONSELECTRIC SERVICE 23.81WIRELESS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 60,444.33 Report Totals 2,290,160.79 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 4k) Subject: Vendor Claims Page 30 Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 8a Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Preliminary Plat and Preliminary Planned Unit Development for Wooddale Pointe. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt two resolutions: approving a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD to allow a five story mixed use building with commercial uses on the ground floor and senior residential on the upper floors with conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission and Staff. POLICY CONSIDERATION: This request is consistent with the Elmwood Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study which recommends a mix of uses in this area, including first floor commercial. BACKGROUND: Development Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct a five story, mixed use, senior residential housing complex at the southeast corner of 36th Street West and Wooddale Avenue South. The building is proposed to include approximately 26,000 square feet of commercial and private common facilities space along 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue and 151 senior dwelling units above. The commercial includes a mixture of private and public uses. The uses are broken down as follows: Uses open to the public. These uses would be located primarily along 36th Street: • 8,000 square foot grocery store • 3,300 square foot deli (Includes sidewalk seating at the corner of 36th and Wooddale.) • 800 square foot bank • 800 square foot salon Uses open to residents only. These uses would be located along Wooddale Avenue: • 4,200 square foot dining area. • 1,200 square foot fitness center • 1,600 square foot club room • 1,000 square foot office • 2,300 square foot community room The proposal follows the principles outlined in the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study that was completed in 2003. These principles include a mixed use building with commercial along 36th Street West, consistent streetscape design along 36th Street West, higher density in the vicinity of the proposed light rail transit station and an urban civic space (park) at the southeast corner of 36th Street West and Wooddale Avenue South. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 2 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Previous Use: In 2001 Quadion Corp. closed its manufacturing facility at 3630 Wooddale Avenue. Quadion owned property on both sides of Wooddale Ave, south of 36th Street, including the subject property. In 2003, the buildings were removed, and the west side was redeveloped by Rottlund Corp. as Village in the Park I (VIP I). In 2005, Rottlund submitted a Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD application to redevelop the east side (subject property) with a mixed use senior building known as Village in the Park II (VIP II). The Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD was approved, however, Rottlund withdrew the applications for Final Plat and Final PUD, and the preliminary approvals have expired. The subject property was reguided and rezoned from industrial to mixed-use in August 4, 2003, in conformance with the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, & Transportation Study completed in January 2003. VIP I SITE Quadian site Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 3 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Zoning Analysis: The proposal meets most requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Some exceptions may be approved as outlined in the Mixed Use Zoning District (MX) and the Planned Unit Development (PUD) provisions of the Zoning Ordinance if the City concludes they meet the intent and criteria outlined in the MX and PUD provisions. Density: There are 151 residential units proposed, however, 40 of the units are memory care units, and as such, do not meet the definition of dwelling units. These units will not have a private kitchen in each unit, and the residents will be dependent upon staff for meals and care. The remaining 111 units are senior living with various levels of assistance provided. The 111 senior living units meet the definition of dwelling units, in that a kitchen is provided in each unit so they can function as a separate dwelling unit. Therefore, for purposes of determining compliance with the maximum allowed density, only the 111 dwelling units were counted. Zoning allows the density to be increased from a maximum of 50 units per acre to 75 units per acre if the development is a mixed use with residential over commercial, and the building is placed to the street with screened or underground parking. This proposal meets these conditions, and therefore is requesting an increase in density to 64 units per acre. Factor Required Proposed Met? Use Mixed-use/Residential Mixed-use/Residential Yes Lot Area 2.0 acre site 2.13 acre site Yes Density 50 units per acre max. 75 units per acre max. (with conditions) 64 units per acre (conditions are met) Yes Height None 62 feet Yes Off-Street Parking Required 212 Provided 176 Yes (See parking discussion below) Setbacks – Front/Rear Yes Setbacks – Side/Side PUD modifications are requested – See analysis below. Yes Non-Residential Floor Area Ratio N/A 0.78 Yes Ground Floor Area Ratio N/A 0.39 Yes Open Area/DORA 9,306 sf (12%) 20,478 sf (26%) Yes Trees 240 trees 42 trees and other landscaping alternatives proposed Yes Transit service None required Limited bus Future light rail Yes Stormwater Required city and watershed standards Regional storm water pond at Hoigaard Village site Yes Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 4 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Parking: The proposal is a mixed use development that includes reductions in parking. Mixed use developments typically require fewer parking spaces for several reasons: 1. The parking spaces are shared among several uses, and each uses need for the parking typically does not occur at the same time, meaning one use may utilize more parking in the morning, while another use will utilize those same parking spaces in the afternoon. 2. People will frequently combine errands and visit more than one shop within the development. 3. The need for parking is reduced because many of the customers come from the residences located above the commercial uses. The ability to share parking spaces allows for more efficient use of the property, therefore, the MX district allows the City Council to reduce the required parking by up to 30% when the proposal utilizes shared parking between uses. Wooddale Pointe shows 176 parking stalls a 17% reduction from the required 212 spaces. (This compares to Village in the Park II, a mixed use development proposal that received Preliminary PUD approval at this site with a 32% reduction in required parking.) Required Number of Spaces Proposed Number of Spaces 40 memory care residential units 8 Restricted to residents and employees of residential facility. 60 111 senior units 111 Structured Available to residents, guests and commercial uses. 95 Restaurant 3,300 sf (Deli/Coffee shop) 38 On-street parking Available to residents, guests and commercial uses. 21 Commercial (9,600 sf) 55 Total provided* 176 Minimum Required without reductions 212 Maximum allowed reduction – 30% (63) Possible Minimum 149 *The total provided represents a reduction of 17% (36 spaces) from the minimum required of 212. As illustrated in the tables above, 60 spaces are provided below-grade, and are for the exclusive use of the residents and employees of the residential facility. The remaining 52 spaces in the underground garage are available for guests of the residents, and customers and employees of the commercial uses. In addition to the underground parking, the proposal includes 43 structured parking spaces in the ground floor level, and 21 on-street parking spaces for a total of 116 parking spaces that are not restricted to the residents only. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 5 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe The 21 on-street parking spaces include only those spaces directly adjacent to the subject property. They do not include the 13 spaces on Yosemite that are adjacent to the neighboring Luggage World building, and they do not include approximately 72 city owned public parking spaces located across 36th Street from the proposed building. The owner of Luggage World expressed a concern that the 13 parking spaces adjacent to his building on Yosemite Ave may be taken up by the uses in the proposed building. The applicant, however, believes they are providing considerably more parking than they need, and they are willing to make all of their 95 on-site parking spaces available to the public. A parking study was completed by Wenck Parking Consultants, and a summary of the report is attached. This report analyzes the proposed uses in a shared parking context, and estimates the resulting parking demand. The report indicates that the proposal needs at least 112 (101 estimated need plus 10%) parking spaces, and that the 176 parking spaces to be constructed exceed the need for the proposal. The size of some of the uses have changed since the report was completed, however, the changes are minor, and do not have a significant impact on the results of the study. The largest reduction in needed parking is derived from the residential component. Wenck is showing 155 senior living units as assisted living. (The actual proposal was reduced to 151 units since the study was completed.) Not all residents of assisted living complexes have cars. In fact, it is the intent of the proposal that people can age in place within the building. They may have a car when they move in, but as time passes, they will lose the ability to drive, but still be able to take the bus and walk to their destinations. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume the required parking can be reduced from the standard one parking space per dwelling unit. Architectural Style and Materials: The building is designed to be consistent with the principles set forth in the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study, including: • The building should be constructed to the right-of-way to create a “Main Street” character. • The buildings should have a vertical mixed-use with commercial uses on the ground floor. • Residential parking and access should not be located along the street. • Parking for commercial uses should be located on 36th Street. Pedestrian access to the building is accommodated by a lobby entrance proposed on both Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street. The lobbies provide access to the residential portion of the building, the grocery store, café and other commercial uses. The grocery store is proposed to take up the entire commercial frontage along Wooddale Avenue, however, the building is designed so that the commercial space can be split into several commercial tenants in the future, each with direct customer access to the sidewalk along Wooddale Avenue. The commercial uses will be accessed from both the lobby and the sidewalk. This provides the pedestrian access from the sidewalk, which is consistent with the city goals of walkable streets, and it meets the needs of the applicant by allowing the residents access without leaving the building. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 6 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe The building is designed with three focal points. The main focal point is the plaza at the corner of Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street. The building wall at the intersection is proposed to be concave to establish a design connection between the building, plaza and art. The building wall, landscaped islands, concrete scoring and the public art will all follow the same curvilinear pattern. The other two focal points are at both lobby entrances along Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street. A resident pick-up/drop-off is proposed at the Wooddale Avenue lobby entrance. A courtyard is proposed in the center of the building, and an outside dining area is proposed at the end of the western leg of the building along Wooddale Avenue is for residents only. The trash is proposed to be managed inside the building, and all deliveries would be made inside the parking level off of Yosemite Avenue. The trucks would access the parking level at the north end, and exit at the south end. All deliveries would be made by straight truck, semi-trucks would not be allowed. The building is proposed to be 62 feet to the top of the roof. This compares to the Village in the Park II proposal that was 54 feet to the midpoint of the gable, and 65 feet to the highest point. Streetscape & Plaza: The city hired SRF to create the streetscape and plaza designs to be consistent with the plans for the 36th Street corridor. The consultant is in the process of working with the city, applicant and the artists of the Dream Elevator and 36th Street art to finalize a plaza design. (See Public Art below.) While the design shown on the site plans is illustrative only, it contains the elements expected to be included in the final design, such as on-street parking, boulevard trees, landscaped islands, benches, streetlights and public art. The final design will be presented with the final PUD. The site plan shows a sidewalk bump out along 36th Street in front of the lobby entrance. Staff is concerned that the bump out would encourage pedestrians to cross 36th Street at this location rather than the legal and safe pedestrian crossing located at the Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street intersection. Therefore, staff is working with the applicant to eliminate the bump out, while satisfying his desire to create a pedestrian scale emphasis for the lobby entrance. The city is working with the owners of all the properties along 36th Street between Wooddale Avenue and Highway 100 to create a special service district. The purpose of the special service district is to create a process by which the property owners can work together to maintain the streetscape. The advantage of the special service district is that it will ensure the maintenance occurs in a consistent manor and at the same time. Public Art: Randy Walker was awarded the contract for creating the art to be located at the intersection of Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street. Mr. Walker proposed a sculpture called “The Dream Elevator”, which is a 40 foot tall cylindrical structure inspired by the Nordic Ware grain elevator. A depiction of the Dream Elevator is shown on the site plans at the very tip of the plaza. Additional art is proposed along the entire 36th Street corridor between Wooddale Avenue and Highway 100. This art is proposed by Marjorie Pitz, and will consist of benches, bollards and planters. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 7 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA): The DORA is satisfied by the courtyard located in the center of the building. City code requires at least 12% of the site be set aside for DORA. Twelve percent of this site is 9,306 Square feet, and the proposed courtyard is 20,478 square feet (26% of the site). The DORA is proposed to be nicely landscaped with a central water feature. The site meets the DORA requirement. Landscaping: 204 trees are required by the zoning ordinance, and 42 trees are proposed to be planted. The zoning ordinance allows other landscaping improvements to count toward the required number of trees. Other improvements include plazas, art, green roof, recreational benefits, etc. The proposal includes a plaza on the corner of Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street, which will be constructed by the applicant, and a contribution to public art. These improvements, together with the 42 proposed trees, meet the landscaping requirements. Stormwater: The stormwater will flow to the regional pond at Hoigaard Village. The developer will contribute financially to the cost of the pond. The amount is determined in accordance to the size of the land area draining to the pond. Setbacks: In a PUD, buildings may be set up to the property line. However, the developer is providing some setback to maintain the character of the neighborhood as outlined in the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study. Particular attention was paid to setbacks along Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street by comparing them to previously approved projects. The chart below compares the proposed Wooddale Pointe street side setbacks to the VIP I, Hoigaard Village, Excelsior & Grand developments, and the setbacks proposed with the VIP II proposal that was withdrawn. The proposed setbacks are in line with these projects, particularly those located along 36th Street West. Setback Wooddale Pointe VIP II (withdrawn) VIP I Hoigaard Village Excelsior & Grand Building to street curb 29 feet 26 feet 18 feet 26 - 40 feet 22 feet Building to on- street parking curb 19 feet 16 feet N/A 26 feet 15 feet Building to property line 8 feet 5 feet 15 feet 14 – 19 feet 5 feet Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 8 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Preliminary Plat: The preliminary plat consists of 1 lot, an outlot, and dedication of additional right-of-way to both 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. The outlot would be deeded to the city for park and future right-of-way needs. The Dream Elevator and the majority of the plaza are proposed to be located in the outlot. Right-of-Way Dedication: A road easement was dedicated in 1975 over the north 19 feet of the entire subject parcel (along 36th Street). The preliminary plat proposes to dedicate the area as right-of-way. As part of the plat of the Final PUD approval for Village in the Park I (VIP I), the developer dedicated a 12 foot road easement along the east side of Wooddale Avenue. This easement would also be removed and dedicated as right of way with the plat. In both cases, the additional right-of-way was required to facilitate planned street improvements and on-street parking. Utility Easements: Due to the small size of the parcel, the close proximity of the building to 36th Street and Wooddale, and the fact that the property is bounded nearly on all sides by public right-of-way, staff has determined that a reduced drainage and utility easement along the perimeter of the lot is warranted. The easement should be reduced from the required 10 feet to the dimension equal to the building setback. A variance should be processed with the Final Plat and Final PUD. The variance would be processed at this time, rather than with the Preliminary Plat and PUD to ensure that the proper reduction is made, as the building setbacks may change slightly due to minor site plan changes made prior to the Final PUD submittal. Approvals: A mixed use building is allowed by Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the Mixed Use Zoning District. The applicant applied for a Preliminary PUD, which requires a public hearing at the Planning Commission, and action by the City Council. If the Preliminary PUD is approved, the applicant has 90 days to submit the Final PUD for review and approval. The Final PUD would be reviewed by the Planning Commission and acted upon by the City Council. A public hearing is not required for the Final PUD. Neighborhood Meeting: Two meetings were held with the neighborhood. The first meeting was with the neighborhood leaders, the second was with the overall neighborhood. The plan presented was a seven story, mixed use building. Concerns were expressed about the height of the building, traffic generated by the uses and parking. Since that meeting, the applicant reduced the building height from seven to five stories, and increased the amount of parking. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 9 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Planning Commission Action: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on June 18, 2008. A copy of the minutes of that meeting is attached for your review. The Planning Commission recommended approval (4-0 vote) of the Preliminary Plat and PUD. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: The Strategic Direction areas of: Gathering Spaces, Transportation, Sidewalk and Trails and Environment are addressed by having a mixed use building occupied with retail and service uses in a manner consistent with the pedestrian-oriented vision of 36th Street. Attachments: Draft Resolution – Preliminary Plat Draft Resolution – Preliminary PUD Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes Site plan and related documents Parking study summary Traffic study summary Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 10 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe RESOLUTION NO. ______ RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF WOODDALE POINTE BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Greco Real Estate Development, LLC, and Rottlund Homes, owners and subdividers of the land proposed to be platted as Wooddale Pointe have submitted an application for approval of preliminary plat of said subdivision in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder. 2. The proposed preliminary plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park. 3. The proposed plat is situated upon the following described lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit: Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 44, “St. Louis Park,” Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11, Block 44, Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, Lot 6, Block 44, Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, except that part lying Westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the Northeast corner of Block 44, Rearrangement of St. Louis Park; thence Westerly 110.00 feet along the North line of said Block 44 to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence Southerly at a right angle, to the Southwesterly line of said Block 44 and there terminating. That part of the North Half of the vacated alley between Block 1, “Collins Second Addition to St. Louis Park” and Block 44, “St. Louis Park,” lying West of the Southerly extension of the East line of Lot 1, Block 44, “St. Louis Park” and Easterly of the Southeasterly extension of the Westerly line of Lot 11, block 44, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park.” AND Block 1, COLLINS SECOND ADDITION TO ST. LOUIS PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 11 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe The portion of the alley lying Easterly of Wooddale Avenue between 36th and 37th Streets for a distance of approximately 250 feet located in: Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, and all of vacated alley and adjoining one half of Yosemite Avenue vacated, Block 1, COLLINS SECOND ADDITION TO ST. LOUIS PARK Conclusion 1. The proposed preliminary plat of Wooddale Pointe is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: a. Condominium association papers must be approved by the City Attorney prior to final plat. b. A variance be applied for prior to final plat approval to reduce the required drainage and utility easements. c. Park dedication be paid prior to the city signing the final plat. d. A $1,000 cash escrow be submitted to guarantee the city receives a fully executed mylar copy of the final plat. e. Park dedication of $108,800 be paid prior to the city signing the final plat. f. Trail dedication of $24,900 be paid prior to the city signing the final plat. g. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 12 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe RESOLUTION NO._______ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED MX-MIXED USE LOCATED AT 3601 WOODDALE AVENUE SOUTH WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received on May 20, 2008 from the applicant, and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was mailed to all owners of property within 350 feet of the subject property plus other affected property owners in the vicinity, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary PUD concept at the meeting of June 18, 2008, and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on June 5, 2008, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted the public hearing at the meeting of June 18, 2008, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary PUD on a 4-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments in the record of decision. BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Greco Real Estate Development, LLC has made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the MX – Mixed Use district located at 3601 Wooddale Avenue South for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, Block 44, “St. Louis Park,” Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11, Block 44, Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, Lot 6, Block 44, Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, except that part lying Westerly of the following described line: Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 13 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Commencing at the Northeast corner of Block 44, Rearrangement of St. Louis Park; thence Westerly 110.00 feet along the North line of said Block 44 to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence Southerly at a right angle, to the Southwesterly line of said Block 44 and there terminating. That part of the North Half of the vacated alley between Block 1, “Collins Second Addition to St. Louis Park” and Block 44, “St. Louis Park,” lying West of the Southerly extension of the East line of Lot 1, Block 44, “St. Louis Park” and Easterly of the Southeasterly extension of the Westerly line of Lot 11, block 44, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park.” AND Block 1, COLLINS SECOND ADDITION TO ST. LOUIS PARK, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The portion of the alley lying Easterly of Wooddale Avenue between 36th and 37th Streets for a distance of approximately 250 feet located in: Lots 1 to 4 inclusive, and all of vacated alley and adjoining one half of Yosemite Avenue vacated, Block 1, COLLINS SECOND ADDITION TO ST. LOUIS PARK 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 08-21-PUD) and the effect of the proposed PUD on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that the PUD will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also determined that the proposed PUD is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 36-367(b)(5). The specific modifications include: a. A 17% reduction in the required parking. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 08-21-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 14 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Conclusion The Preliminary Planned Unit Development at the location described is approved based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the Preliminary PUD official exhibits. 2. The following maximum and minimum requirements, as indicated in the official exhibits, shall apply to the PUD: a. A maximum of 151 residential units. b. A minimum of 155 structured parking spaces. c. A 17% reduction from the required parking spaces to allow 176 parking spaces instead of the required 212 parking spaces. d. A minimum of 21 on-street parking spaces shall be provided. 3. Conditions for the approval of the Planned Unit Development, to be included in the Development Agreement between the City and the Developer, are as follows: a. Developer agrees to install, at its expense, street, on-street parking and streetscape improvements along all public and private streets and access drives subject to final streetscape designs, Final PUD approval and City approval of detailed construction drawings. b. Developer agrees to enter into a special service district for the continued maintenance of the streetscape along 36th Street West and Wooddale Avenue. c. Developer agrees to enter into a snow-removal agreement with the City to ensure all snow is removed from Yosemite Avenue and 37th Street West. d. Developer agrees to contribute $100,000 toward the construction of the regional storm water pond located at Hoigaard Village. e. Developer agrees to contribute financially toward the public art to be located in the plaza area at the corner of Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street West. The amount will be finalized with the final PUD. f. All deliveries shall be made inside the structured parking located adjacent to Yosemite Avenue. Deliveries lasting less than 15 minutes may be made utilize on-street parking bays. g. All trash handling and storage facilities shall be located inside the building. h. No more than 60 underground parking spaces shall be restricted to residents and employees of the residence. The remaining structured and surface parking shall be available for public parking. i. Developer agrees to place any on-site utilities underground. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 15 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe 4. The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground floor, non-residential facades located in the Mixed-Use building facing West 36th Street: a. Façade Transparency. Windows and doors shall meet the following requirements: i. For street-facing facades, no more than 10% of total window and door area shall be glass block, mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass, finishes or material including window painting and signage. The remaining 90% of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted glass, allowing views into and out of the interior. ii. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum of 3 feet. This requirement shall not prohibit the display of merchandise. Display windows may be used to meet the transparency requirement. b. Awnings. i. Awnings must be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. ii. Backlit awnings are prohibited. c. Use of Sidewalk. A business may use that portion of a sidewalk extending a maximum of 5 feet from the building wall for the following purposes, provided a 6 foot minimum horizontal clearance along West 36th Street is maintained between obstructions on the private and public sidewalks and provided that all activity is occurring on private property: i. Display of merchandise. ii. Benches, planters, ornaments and art. iii. Signage, as permitted in the zoning ordinance. iv. Dining areas may extend beyond the 5 foot maximum, provided an 8 foot minimum horizontal clearance along West 36th Street is maintained between the obstructions on the sidewalk. d. All wall vents and assorted fixtures shall be painted to match the color of the wall they are attached to. 5. Prior to starting any site work, the following conditions shall be met: a. The City shall approve a Final PUD and Final Plat. b. Proof of Recording the Final Plat shall be submitted to the City. c. A site plan showing the required fire lanes shall be submitted. d. Building material samples and colors shall be submitted. e. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant and owner. f. A preconstruction conference shall be held with the appropriate development, construction and city representatives. g. A staging plan for construction shall be filed with the City. h. All necessary permits must be obtained. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 16 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Pursuant to Section 36-367(e)(6) of the Zoning Ordinance, the City will require execution of a development agreement as a condition of approval of the Final P.U.D. The development agreement shall address those issues which the City Council deems appropriate and necessary. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute the development agreement. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 17 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe EXCERPTS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES – JUNE 18, 2008 A. Preliminary Plat and PUD – Wooddale Pointe Location: 3601 Wooddale Avenue Applicant: Greco Real Estate Case No.: 08-21-PUD Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report for the proposed five story mixed use building with commercial uses on the ground floor and 151 senior dwelling units above. Link Wilson, Kaas Wilson Architects, representing Greco Development, discussed the project and said that it was an attempt to recreate senior housing. They wanted vibrancy and interaction with young people and with the park. The first floor will have a retail feel. There will be street parking and on-grade parking for the retail and guests in their building and also for Luggage World. There will be 40 memory care units, an assisted level and also independent living. The hope is for people to enter the building at a younger age and then be able to age in place. There are few options now for couples with one spouse needing memory care. There will be cafe seating to the northwest and a private courtyard in the back for residents. He noted a correction on the plan where there is street parking. The intention is to have a tall planter in the area of the main entry. Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, stated the public art piece was chosen through a public art process and is called The Dream Elevator. It has quite a bit of color, versus what was shown on the plan, and people will be able to walk through it. Commissioner Morris said he felt the streetscaping was stark with a lot of pavement and very few trees. He asked if the tree species been selected. Ms. McMonigal replied staff has been working on a streetscape plan for the stretch of 36th Street between Wooddale and Highway 100. A landscape architect will be designing the streetscape along this property to match the rest of the new streetscape along 36th Street. It also includes another element of public art along this three to four block stretch. The trees will be irrigated. Commissioner Morris asked about parking and the spaces between Luggage World and the at grade parking. He asked if the spaces on Yosemite counted in the street parking for the site. Mr. Morrison replied yes, it was counted as on-street parking. Commissioner Morris asked if this development got all of the on-street parking and any other development such as Luggage World, should they want to remodel, and need on-street parking, be able to count it? Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 18 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Mr. Morrison replied no, it was not treated that way. On-street parking is public parking and nobody can claim it and prevent someone else from parking in it. Typically the on-street parking spaces are directly adjacent to the property. Commissioner Morris asked about the first level grade parking where it appears they can create a loop where they go in at the South end, not find a stall and loop back in. Mr. Morrison replied that was correct. Commissioner Morris stated the result at Trader Joe’s was a horrendous parking foul up. He said since a grocery store is proposed at Wooddale he was not sure if the reduction of parking would be significant enough to create a parking problem should the grocer become a popular site as well as the other commercial businesses. He felt they should stick to the need of the required parking. Mr. Morrison replied the entity of Trader Joe’s was regional and people drove a long way to get there. The parking problem had subsided. This site provides considerably more parking. Parking here is directly adjacent to the store. Commissioner Morris expressed concern about parking for the grocery store. Mr. Wilson clarified there is also underground parking in the southern portion of the site. There are over 100 parking stalls in the garage that can be used for retail parking with a public elevator. This store is only 8,000 square feet with fewer services than Trader Joe’s. Commissioner Morris asked if the senior units would have dedicated parking. Ms. McMonigal replied there are 176 spaces, including the 13 adjacent to Luggage World. Sixty spaces would be for residents only and the rest would be available for retail. Commissioner Morris asked if the 40 memory care units were included in the 111 senior units. Mr. Wilson replied no. Forty-nine units are assisted living and 66 are independent. Studies indicate that the 60 underground spaces were more than adequate for the 111 independent and assisted units. Commissioner Morris asked about bicycle storage. Mr. Wilson replied it wasn’t shown, but there are many angles in the garage and there is a lot of space in the middle where there would be room for bicycles. He said he didn’t see a lot of seniors using them, but staff could. Commissioner Morris felt there would be more seniors bicycling and said he would like to see designation in the final PUD. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 19 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Mr. Wilson noted the average age in this building would be 83. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. Joel Lavintman, 1295 Northland Dr., Counsel for Luggage World, stated his client was concerned about the lack of information they had received about this project. The main access to this project would come off the reopened 37th Street. One of the earlier images suggested everything would be coming through Yosemite, which was little more than an alley. They were concerned about the impact of an additional 176 vehicles coming through that area as it related to Luggage World and their customers and the impact it would have on their business. They were uncomfortable they heard about neighborhood meetings that didn’t include the nearest neighbor. They requested an opportunity to talk to the architect about their concerns outside of this meeting. If access is coming off of 36th, with an average age of 83, it was fair to assume there would be a significant number of emergency vehicles in and out of the property. He said that didn’t even address the question of construction vehicles and their impact on Luggage World. He and his client had a concern about the lack of information and time to formulate an intelligent response or set of questions to what was being presented. Ms. McMonigal noted there would be two ways in and out of the property, one on 37th Street and one on Yosemite from 36th Street. The area of Yosemite off of 36th is a public street. While that parking is available to Luggage World, it is not owned by Luggage World and is public parking and public access is allowed. With the split of traffic, she didn’t think it would cause serious problems in and out of that property. The parking Luggage World had available to it wouldn’t be diminished. The property owners have offered first floor parking for public use, which includes Luggage World. Parking would increase. There will also be on-street parking and a drop off area and entrances into the new building. If there were emergency vehicles, they likely wouldn’t come into the site, but would be able to pull up along Wooddale or 36th to conduct their business. Mr. Lavintman stated the full impact regarding parking remains unclear. Commissioner Morris indicated this property owner stated for the previous development they received no notice. He asked if they were involved in discussions for the previous development. Ms. McMonigal replied they did receive public hearing notices for this development and the previous development. There was an Elmwood neighborhood meeting and she was unsure if they received notification for those meetings. Mr. Lavintman replied they didn’t. Commissioner Morris continued by saying that for the prior Rottlund project all access was coming off of Wooddale. He said with the exception of the building along Yosemite, it was a parking lot along Yosemite. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 20 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Mr. Lavintman clarified they had received notice for this evening’s meeting, but not for the neighborhood meeting. Adeel Saad, 5727 W 36th St, Luggage World owner, stated the City had allowed them to put handicapped access where the parking lots are to access their building. This is now being called public parking. Their customers would not be able to find a spot and would leave. He felt Luggage World was being pushed away and he was not notified of the neighborhood meeting. He believed the entrance to this building was different than the previous project. They needed more time to talk to the applicant about parking. Ms. McMonigal responded they weren’t intending to insult anybody and felt there would be more parking for all of the businesses there including Luggage World. The first floor has 60 or 70 at grade spaces and more on-street parking, which would be a short walking distance to their building. The Luggage World building doesn’t have any of its own parking and relies on the public street parking, which was an unusual situation. The city planners had worked with the developers to preserve the head in parking next to Luggage World. If it were a public street there would only be parallel parking, with fewer spaces. They worked to preserve the 13 spaces along that area. This development is also offering first floor parking and there would be new parking spaces along 36th and Wooddale in front of this building that are open to the public. The parking situation overall will be improved for everyone in the area. In addition there is another public parking lot across the street that holds 120 cars. Staff feels the parking will be improved and compared to the previous proposal, there is a lot more parking available for the development and neighboring properties. Mr. Saad stated at any time there are five to six cars parking on the west side of Luggage World. The handicapped parking was a concern. He was concerned there would not be enough parking and would push him out of business. Adekola Okulaja, 3712 Wooddale Av. S, stated he was excited there was something going onto this lot, but said he shared some of Mr. Adeel’s concerns. He felt the math for the parking spaces didn’t add up. He was unsure if the underground parking was just for residents. He felt the square footage of the grocery would be comparable to Trader Joe’s. Ms. McMonigal believed Trader Joe’s has 14-15,000 square feet. Mr. Okulaja indicated he was also concerned about emergency vehicles and the noise it would create for residents in the area. There would also be delivery traffic to the grocery store and noise from that. Mr. Morrison replied deliveries would be made in the structured parking at grade off of Yosemite and accessing the building. This building is not set up for semi-trailer deliveries, so they would be looking primarily at step vans and straight trucks. They hadn’t discussed the noise from emergency vehicles, but had discussed where the vehicles would be stopping. They anticipated vehicles would stop at the pick-up/drop-off area along Wooddale or along the on street parking along 36th Street. The fire station is located off Wooddale to the south. The underground parking is a mixture Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 21 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe between private parking and public parking. Sixty spaces would be reserved for residents and the remaining spaces would be available to the public, about 52 spaces, 42 at grade and also on street parking. Ms. McMonigal clarified without the on-street parking, the new added parking would be 155 spaces. Sixty of those would be restricted to residents, so there would be 95 available structured public parking spaces, plus the on street parking. Delivery times are daytime only. Mr. Morrison noted there is also a public lot across 36th St. Chair Robertson asked if there would be medical staff in the unit, or will the Fire Dept. always be called. Also, because they are so close, are they obligated to use sirens. Mr. Morrison replied they could discuss that with the Fire Department. Mr. Wilson responded there are RNs in the building 24 hours a day. Memory care for every 16 people needs two staff persons. He said he had worked on many senior housing facilities and the issue of emergency vehicles comes up. The fact that people are trying to seek out a healthy living environment where there are registered nurses available 24 hours a day is a good thing because many things can be handled in-house and residents can be taken to the hospital by staff. Any time there is multi-family, there will be more emergency calls. The City’s traffic engineers have stated there is a need of 101 parking spaces and they were providing over 150 within. It was never their intention to count any street parking, but they are adding more street parking and he would suggest their development would be comfortable to sign the street parking in front of Luggage World for their parking only. They were confident they had adequate parking within their facility. Mr. Lavintman stated they were just shown where deliveries would be and it was at Luggage World’s front door step, which would be disruptive to their business. Ms. McMonigal noted the deliveries would be inside of the parking ramp on the first floor and not on the Yosemite Avenue right-of-way. Mr. Morrison showed on the map how the deliveries would be made. As there was no one else present wishing to speak, Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated anytime there is a development like this with density on a small parcel of property to make it work, there are challenges with parking and deliveries, etc. They needed to have this discussion. She agreed with the owner of Luggage World, whether or not they received a notice or not, the impression is that they had been left out of the process. They need to be incorporated into the discussions and she apologized to them. She felt they should put signs on both of the entrances from either Wooddale or West 36th Street that it is the entrance for Luggage World parking. The idea of assigning all of those parking spaces to Luggage World was fair. She liked the plan and wanted the communication to flow with all of the parties. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 22 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Commissioner Morris asked where trash and recycling areas were for storage and pick up. Mr. Morrison replied trash would be handled entirely within the building in the underground parking areas. Trash would be delivered to the storage areas by chute. It would be pulled out to 37th Street and picked up from there. Commissioner Morris asked about the area marked service, asking if that is where deliveries would take place. Mr. Morrison replied yes, that was a service area for deliveries. Commissioner Morris asked if that would subtract some of the parking spaces. Mr. Morrison replied yes, a few. Commissioner Morris noted he had never seen stacking in a parking garage drive aisle allowed for delivery or service vehicles. If those vehicles pull in, they could stop people from getting in and out of the parking, which was not a good delivery point for the site. He was not comfortable with that or the number of parking stalls. With 2,600 square feet of retail space that would require deliveries and have customers going in and out and a reduction in parking, it may be inadequate. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked what reduction in parking he was referring to. Commissioner Morris stated the required parking is 212 and they were going to reduce it to 176. Looking at the plan and layout and the uses being proposed, he thought the extra spaces would be needed and if they can’t do it with the space they had and they couldn’t do proof of parking for future expansion should the need arise, he was not in favor of granting the reduction. He was not convinced a reduction was warranted for this site use. Ms. McMonigal stated the parking table might not be as clear as they could have made it. There is some overlap, however there are 95 spaces available to the public and the commercial requirement is 93 spaces. Commissioner Morris was not convinced with the amount of visitors to the units and parking the seniors would need and with grocery generating a lot of use, that it would be adequate parking. Commissioner Shapiro stated it was hard to know what traffic would be generated. An 8,000 square foot grocery store is more of a neighborhood grocery store. Trader Joe’s is its own entity and there is nothing else in the country like it that generates the traffic and sales. This store is more for the people in the general area and he didn’t see a lot of people going to it. Cub and Byerly’s are where most people would shop. This would be easy for people to walk to and he didn’t see it generating a lot of traffic. The hair salon and restaurant would be for the neighborhood. He didn’t have a problem with the parking. There is a city lot on 36th Street where people can also park. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 23 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Commissioner Johnston-Madison noted the restaurant is for the residents and those that can prove they live in the neighborhood. Ms. McMonigal replied food service would be separate for the residents and a small deli/coffee shop is the intended use. Chair Robertson stated the parking didn’t bother him a great deal. Through design, making sure deliveries could be handled without clogging it and being respectful of the neighbors and Luggage World were all attainable. He was chagrined that the neighbor did not feel part of the process and strongly encouraged there be interaction from this point forward. He was confident those fears and issues could be worked out. The Planning Commission is a recommending body and no final decisions were made here. Some of these things can be worked out before going to City Council. He was conflicted by the project in that he liked what he saw and thought the architecture and design was good, but found fault with the zoning that it didn’t feel like a mixed use building. This fell short of the studies and what they had looked for on 36th St. This met the definition of mixed use, but didn’t meet the intent. It is a senior residential building that allowed a little bit of public interaction, but the grocery and hair salon were incidental uses to a senior living facility, not commercial retail uses. This was not what was envisioned for this corner, although he thought it was well done. Commissioner Johnston-Madison agreed this was not what the neighborhood envisioned for this corner although some people have told her that it would be great for their parents. There was another perspective out there. Chair Robertson felt it worked at this site and liked it, but they may need to look at the wording for zoning and mixed use. Commissioner Morris stated that the traffic report was based on data that may have been different than what they were presented. It says a 1,000 square foot hair salon that will be principally used by the residents. The trip generations for the gift shop and hair salon show one trip. His perception was that this was open to the public. He asked for further explanation. Chair Robertson stated he didn’t think the numbers were skewed, he thought it wasn’t a mixed use, it was more of a residential building. Commissioner Morris indicated he didn’t think there were any issues around the preliminary plat and he wanted to separate the motion. Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend approval of the preliminary plat, subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Shapiro seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Page 24 Subject: PUD – Wooddale Pointe Commissioner Morris asked if they held the Preliminary PUD over a cycle to address some of the issues and allow time for the abutting property owner to have a discussion with the developer, would it be within the 60 day rule. Ms. McMonigal replied she didn’t think there would be a problem with the 60 days, however they were trying to move it along so the applicant could begin construction this fall. This recommendation goes to City Council and they are both preliminary. There will be a final plat and PUD that will come back to Planning Commission and City Council. Staff is happy to facilitate a meeting with the architect and the neighboring property owner to go over the issues. Commissioner Morris noted with that in mind, that this is preliminary and they had expressed concerns that will give the developer and staff direction to broaden the reports to the Commission and Council or modify some of the issues. Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend approval of the preliminary Planned Unit Development, subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Shapiro seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale Pointe Page 25 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale Pointe Page 26 AC AIR CONDITIONERACOUST ACOUSTIC/ACOUSTICALACT ACOUSTIC TILEADH ADHESIVEAFF ABOVE FINISH FLOORAGGR AGGREGATEALT ALTERNATEALUM ALUMINUMAP ACCESS PANELARCH ARCHITECTURALASPH ASPHALTAVE AVENUEBD/BDS BOARD/BOARDSBFE BOTTOM OF FOOTINGBITUM BITUMINOUSBKT BRACKETBLDG BUILDINGBLK BLOCKBLKG BLOCKINGBLVD BOULEVARDBM BEAM/BENCH MARKBOT BOTTOMBR BEDROOMBRG BEARINGBRK BRICKBSMT BASEMENTBTWN BETWEENCAB CABINETCB CATCH BASINCEM CEMENTCFB CEMENT FIBER BOARDCG CORNER GUARDCIP CAST IRON PIPECJ CONTROL JOINTCL CENTER LINECLG CEILINGCLKG CAULKINGCLO CLOSETCMU CONC. MASONRY UNITCNTR COUNTERCO COMPANYCOL COLUMNCOMB COMBINATIONCOMP COMPOSITIONCONC CONCRETECONST CONSTRUCTIONCONT CONTINUOUSCONTR CONTRACTORCORP CORPORATIONCORR CORRIDORCPT CARPETCR CURTAIN RODCSK COUNTERSINKCT CERAMIC TILECU FT CUBIC FOOTCU IN CUBIC INCHCU YD CUBIC YARDD DRYERDBL DOUBLEDEPT DEPARTMENTDET DETAILDF DRINKING FOUNTAINDIA DIAMETERDIAG DIAGONALDIM DIMENSIONDIV DIVISIONDN DOWNDPRF DAMPPROOFDR DINING ROOM/DOORDS DOWNSPOUTDT DRAPERY TRACKDW DISHWASHERDWG DRAWINGDWR DRAWERE EASTEA EACHEIFS EXT. INSUL FIN SYSTEMEL ELEVATIONELEC ELECTRIC/ELECTRICALELEV ELEVATORENGR ENGINEERENT ENTRANCEEQ EQUALEQUIP EQUIPMENTEST ESTIMATEEW EACH WAYEWC ELECTRIC WATER COOLEREX EXISTINGEXC EXCAVATEEXH EXHAUSTEXP JT EXPANSION JOINTEXT EXTERIORF TO F FACE TO FACEFAB FABRICATEFD FLOOR DRAINFDN FOUNDATIONFEP FINISHED END PANELFE FIRE EXTINGUISHERFF FINISH FACEFH FIRE HOSEFIG FIGUREFIN FINISH/ FINISHEDFIX FIXTUREFL FLOORFLASH FLASHINGFLUOR FLUORESCENTFM FACE OF MASONRYFOW FACE OF WALLFPRF FIREPROOFFR FRAMEFRT FREIGHTFS FACE STUDFSH FACE OF SHEATHINGFT FOOT/FEETFTG FOOTINGFURN FURNISHFURR FURRINGF.V. FIELD VERIFIEDG GASGA GAUGEGAL GALLONGALV GALVANIZEDGAR GARAGEGB GRAB BARGC GENERAL CONTRACTORGEN GENERALGI GALVANIZED IRONGL GLASS/GLAZINGGOVT GOVERNMENTGPBD GYPSUM WALLBOARDGPM GALLON PER MINUTEGR GRADEGRTG GRATINGGS GREASE SHIELDGYP GYPSUMHB HOSE BIBHC HOLLOW COREHD HEADHDRL HANDRAILGYP GYPSUMHB HOSE BIBHC HOLLOW COREHD HEADHDRL HANDRAILHDW HARDWAREHM HOLLOW METALHORIZ HORIZONTALHR HOURHT HEIGHTHWY HIGHWAYID IDENTIFICATION/INSIDE DIAIN INCHINCL INCLUDEINC INCORPORATEINFO INFORMATIONINSUL INSULATE/INSULATIONINT INTERIORINV INVERTJAN JANITORJCT JUNCTIONJT JOINTJST JOISTKD KNOCK DOWNKIT/K KITCHENL LINENLAB LABORATORYLAD LADDERLAM LAMINATELAT LATITUDELAV LAVATORYLB/LBS POUND/POUNDSLBR LUMBERLD LOADLDG LOADINGLG LENGTHLH LEFT HANDLIB LIBRARYLIN LINOLEUMLNDY LAUNDRYLOA LENGTH OVERALLLONG LONGITUDELR LIVING ROOMLT LIGHTMACH MACHINEMAS MASONRYMATL MATERIALMAX MAXIMUMMC MEDICINE CABINETMECH MECHANICALMEMB MEMBRANEMEMO MEMORANDUMMEZZ MEZZANINEMFG MANUFACTUREDMFR MANUFACTURERMH MANHOLEMIN MINIMUMMIR MIRRORMISC MISCELLANEOUSMLDG MOULDINGMO MASONRY OPENINGMOD MODULARMTL METALMTD MOUNTEDMULL MULLIONN NORTHNIC NOT IN CONTRACTNO/# NUMBERNOM NOMINALNTS NOT TO SCALEOA OVERALLOC ON CENTEROFF OFFICEOPNG OPENINGOPP OPPOSITEORIG ORIGINALOSB ORIENTED STRAND BOARDOZ OUNCEP&G PITCH & GRAVELPASS PASSENGERPCF POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOTPED PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC COATINGPER PERIMETERPERF PERFORATEPERP PERPENDICULARPIL PILASTERP LAM PLASTIC LAMINATEPL PLATEPLAS PLASTERPLMB PLUMBINGPLYWD PLYWOODPNEU PNEUMATICPOL POLISHEDPORC PORCELAINPSF POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOTPSI POUNDS PER SQUARE INCHPT PAINT/POINTPTD PAPER TOWEL DISPENSERPTN PARTITIONPREFAB PREFABRICATEDPREFIN PREFINISHEDPROP PROPERTYPUR PURLINSQR QUARTER/QUARTER-ROUNDQT QUARRY TILEQTY QUANTITYR RISERR&S ROD & SHELFRAD RADIATION/RADIUSRB RESILIENT BASERC RESILIENT CHANNELRCT RUBBER COMPOSITION TILERD ROAD/ROUND/ROOFDRAINRECP RECEPTACLEREC RECESSEDREF REFERENCEREFRIG REFRIGERATORREG REGULAR/REGISTERREINF REINFORCE/REINFORCINGREQD REQUIREDRESIL RESILIENTRET RETURNRH ROBE HOOK/RIGHT HANDRFG ROOFINGRM ROOMRO ROUGH OPENINGRS REDUCER STRIPRWD REDWOODRWL RAIN WATER LEADERS SOUTHSAN SANITARYSB SPLASH BLOCKSC SOLID CORESCHED SCHEDULESD SOAP DISHS DISP SOAP DISPENSERSEC SECONDSECT SECTIONSH SHELF/SHINGLESSHR SHOWERSHT SHEETSHTG SHEATHINGSID SIDINGSIM SIMILARSLID SLIDINGSM SMOOTH (FINISH)SND SANITARY NAPKIN DISPENSERSNR SANITARY NAPKIN RECEPTACLESPEC SPECIFICATIONSQ SQUARESS SERVICE SINKSSA SINGLE STRENGTH AS STL STAINLESS STEELST STREETSTD STANDARDSTL STEELSTOR STORAGESTR STRINGERSTXT SPRAY TEXTURESUB FL SUBFLOORSUSP SUSPENDEDSV SHEET VINYLS4S SURFACED FOUR SIDEST TREADT&G TONGUE & GROOVETB TOWEL BARTC TOP OF CURBTECH TECHNICALTEL TELEPHONETEMP TEMPEREDTERR TERRAZZOTEX TEXTURETFE TOP OF FOOTING ELEVTHRESH THRESHOLDTHRU THROUGHTK BD TACKBOARDT.O TOP OF . . .TPH TOILET PAPER HOLDERTRANS TRANSOMTV TELEVISIONTW TOP OF WALLTYP TYPICALUL UNDERWRITER'S LAB, INCUNO UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISEVAN VANITYVB VAPOR BARRIER/VINYL BASEVEN VENEERVENT VENTILATORVERT VERTICALVEST VESTIBULEVIN VINYLVWC VINYL WALL COVERINGVCP VITRIFIED CLAY PIPEVCT VINYL COMP TILEW WEST/WASHERW/ WITHW/O WITHOUTWC WATER CLOSETWD WOODWDW WINDOWWI WROUGHT IRONWP WATERPROOFWR WATER RESISTANWS WEATHERSTRIPWSCT WAINSCOTINGWT WEIGHTWWF WELDED WIRE FABRICYD YARDABBREVIATIONS(These patterns are scaled for 1-1/2"= 1'-0"details)FOAM/POURED IN PLACE INSULEARTHCONCRETE MASONRY UNITSTEELRIGID INSULATION ORBRICK/ MANUFACTURED STONECONCRETESANDGRANULAR FILLGYPSUM BOARDROUGH WOODQUARRY OR CERAMIC TILEWOODSTUD WALLWOOD BLOCKING OR SHIMBATT INSULATION (INSUL-10)PLYWOOD11AXXX1DOOR NUMBERROOM NAME / NUMBERINTERIOR/EXTERIORWALL TYPE, FLOOR-CEILING TYPEREVISION CLOUDDETAIL CALLOUTBREAK LINEHDCP SYMBOLELEVATION / WORK POINTNORTH ARROWKEYNOTESADDENDUM, CHANGEORDER, PROPOSALREQUEST, ARCHITECTSSUPPLEMENTALINSTRUCTIONSINTERIORELEVATIONDETAILSECTIONELEVATIONAXXAXXXXAXXXAXXXABCD1iRoom name101XAXXXCD BUNIT NUMBER / NAMEDETAIL NUMBERName4xxx101xSYMBOLS KEYW24301i1tCASEWORK TAGPARKING TAGWINDOW TAGHATCH KEYDateDrawn ByChecked ByProject Number308 East 18th StreetSuite 301Minneapolis, MN 55404tel: (612) 879-6000fax: (612) 879-6666www.kaaswilson.comI HEARBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM AREGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.LINK WILSON REG. NO: 21629 1" = 1'-0"7/1/2008 10:47:04 PMP:\0746-Wooddale Pointe St Louis Park\Models\0746-Wooddale Pointe.rvtProject AdressProject AdressCover SheetCheckerAuthorIssue Date0746WooddalePointeGreco Real EstateDevelopmnet LLCA100Wooddale PointeConsultant Info129 North 2nd StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401Drawing ListSheetNumberSheet NameA100 Cover SheetA110 Code ReviewA200 Site PlanA300 Garage PlanA310 First Floor PlanA320 Second Floor PlanA330 Third Floor PlanA340 Fourth Floor PlanA350 Fifth Floor PlanA360 Reflected Ceiling PlanA400 Enlarged Garage PlansA410 Enlarged First Floor PlansA420 Enlarged Second Floor PlansA430 Enlarged Third Floor PlansA450 Unit PlansA500 Exterior ElevationsA600 Building SectionsA610 Wall SectionsA620 Stair SectionsA624 Stair DetailsA700 Room Finish ScheduleA710 Commons Interior ElevationsA720 Unit Interior ElevationsA800 Wall TypesA810 Door ScheduleA811 Door DetailsA820 Window ScheduleA821 Window DetailsA822 Opening DetailsA825 Int. Public DetailsA826 Int. Public DetailsA830 Exterior DetailsA831 Exterior DetailsA832 Roof / Attic DetailsA833 Roof / Wall DetailsA840 Interior DetailsA841 Interior ConnectionsA842 Penetration DetailsA850 Unit DetailsA851 Unit DetailsA860 Signage DetailsRev. No.RevisionDateUnit MixService TypeNameUnit TypeArea CountAssisted Living Unit A1 1 Bedroom774.00 SF 12Assisted Living Unit A2 1 Bedroom871.10 SF 4Assisted Living Unit A3 1 Bedroom720.00 SF 3Assisted Living Unit B2 1 Bedroom + Den 1129.10 SF 4Assisted Living Unit C2 2 Bedroom1161.05 SF 6Assisted Living Unit S3 Studio516.00 SF 16Assisted Living: 45Care Suite1292.06 SF 2Care Suite2292.06 SF 2Care Suite3292.06 SF 2Care Suite4357.96 SF 2Care Suite5324.18 SF 2Care Suite: 10Independant Living Unit A1 1 Bedroom774.00 SF 29Independant Living Unit A2 1 Bedroom871.10 SF 3Independant Living Unit A3 1 Bedroom720.00 SF 3Independant Living Unit B1 1 Bedroom + Den 1032.00 SF 18Independant Living Unit C1 2 Bedroom1161.00 SF 9Independant Living Unit C3 2 Bedroom1387.10 SF 3Independant Living Unit C4 2 Bedroom1280.44 SF 3Independant Living: 68Memory CareUnit A1 1 Bedroom774.00 SF 2Memory CareUnit A2 1 Bedroom871.10 SF 2Memory CareUnit S3 Studio516.00 SF 30Memory Care: 34Grand total: 157Parking ScheduleLevelCount01 First Floor 4400 Garage 110154Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale PointePage 27 UPUPUPMech.GarageElec.Equip.LobbyEquip.LobbyUtilityDateDrawn ByChecked ByProject Number308 East 18th StreetSuite 301Minneapolis, MN 55404tel: (612) 879-6000fax: (612) 879-6666www.kaaswilson.comI HEARBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM AREGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.LINK WILSON REG. NO: 21629 1/16" = 1'-0"7/1/2008 10:47:04 PMP:\0746-Wooddale Pointe St Louis Park\Models\0746-Wooddale Pointe.rvtProject AdressGarage PlanCheckerAuthorIssue Date0746WooddalePointeGreco Real EstateDevelopmnet LLCA300Consultant Info129 North 2nd StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401 1/16" = 1'-0"100 GarageRev. No.RevisionDateMeeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale PointePage 28 UPDNDNDNUPUPTrash /RecyclingRetail StorageLobbyPublic ParkingRetailCafeKitchenFitnessBeautyNurseOfficeCommunityRoomPublic LobbyStor.DiningLoungePrivate DiningMailDateDrawn ByChecked ByProject Number308 East 18th StreetSuite 301Minneapolis, MN 55404tel: (612) 879-6000fax: (612) 879-6666www.kaaswilson.comI HEARBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM AREGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.LINK WILSON REG. NO: 21629 1/16" = 1'-0"7/1/2008 10:47:05 PMP:\0746-Wooddale Pointe St Louis Park\Models\0746-Wooddale Pointe.rvtProject AdressFirst Floor PlanCheckerAuthorIssue Date0746WooddalePointeGreco Real EstateDevelopmnet LLCA310Consultant Info129 North 2nd StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401 1/16" = 1'-0"101 First FloorRev. No.RevisionDateMeeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale PointePage 29 DNDNDNUPUPUPDay RoomDay RoomServiceMemoryTerraceCare SuiteCare SuitePublic TerraceDateDrawn ByChecked ByProject Number308 East 18th StreetSuite 301Minneapolis, MN 55404tel: (612) 879-6000fax: (612) 879-6666www.kaaswilson.comI HEARBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM AREGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.LINK WILSON REG. NO: 21629 1/16" = 1'-0"7/1/2008 10:47:06 PMP:\0746-Wooddale Pointe St Louis Park\Models\0746-Wooddale Pointe.rvtProject AdressSecond FloorPlanCheckerAuthorIssue Date0746WooddalePointeGreco Real EstateDevelopmnet LLCA320Consultant Info129 North 2nd StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401 1/16" = 1'-0"102 Second FloorRev. No.RevisionDateMeeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale PointePage 30 REF.REF.REF.UPDNUPDNUPDNTrash /RecyclingLaundryMech.Stor.DateDrawn ByChecked ByProject Number308 East 18th StreetSuite 301Minneapolis, MN 55404tel: (612) 879-6000fax: (612) 879-6666www.kaaswilson.comI HEARBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM AREGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.LINK WILSON REG. NO: 21629 1/16" = 1'-0"7/1/2008 10:47:07 PMP:\0746-Wooddale Pointe St Louis Park\Models\0746-Wooddale Pointe.rvtProject AdressThird FloorPlanCheckerAuthorIssue Date0746WooddalePointeGreco Real EstateDevelopmnet LLCA330Consultant Info129 North 2nd StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401 1/16" = 1'-0"103 Third FloorRev. No.RevisionDateMeeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale PointePage 31 REF.REF.REF.UPDNUPDNUPDNDateDrawn ByChecked ByProject Number308 East 18th StreetSuite 301Minneapolis, MN 55404tel: (612) 879-6000fax: (612) 879-6666www.kaaswilson.comI HEARBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM AREGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.LINK WILSON REG. NO: 21629 1/16" = 1'-0"7/1/2008 10:47:08 PMP:\0746-Wooddale Pointe St Louis Park\Models\0746-Wooddale Pointe.rvtProject AdressFourth FloorPlanCheckerAuthorIssue Date0746WooddalePointeGreco Real EstateDevelopmnet LLCA340Consultant Info129 North 2nd StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401 1/16" = 1'-0"104 Fourth FloorRev. No.RevisionDateMeeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale PointePage 32 DNDNDNDateDrawn ByChecked ByProject Number308 East 18th StreetSuite 301Minneapolis, MN 55404tel: (612) 879-6000fax: (612) 879-6666www.kaaswilson.comI HEARBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM AREGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.LINK WILSON REG. NO: 21629 1/16" = 1'-0"7/1/2008 10:47:09 PMP:\0746-Wooddale Pointe St Louis Park\Models\0746-Wooddale Pointe.rvtProject AdressFifth Floor PlanCheckerAuthorIssue Date0746WooddalePointeGreco Real EstateDevelopmnet LLCA350Consultant Info129 North 2nd StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401 1/16" = 1'-0"105 Fifth FloorRev. No.RevisionDateMeeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale PointePage 33 DateDrawn ByChecked ByProject Number308 East 18th StreetSuite 301Minneapolis, MN 55404tel: (612) 879-6000fax: (612) 879-6666www.kaaswilson.comI HEARBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM AREGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDERTHE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.LINK WILSON REG. NO: 216297/1/2008 10:47:09 PMP:\0746-Wooddale Pointe St Louis Park\Models\0746-Wooddale Pointe.rvtProject AdressExteriorElevationsCheckerAuthorIssue Date0746WooddalePointeGreco Real EstateDevelopmnet LLCA500Consultant Info129 North 2nd StreetMinneapolis, MN 55401Rev. No.RevisionDateMeeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale PointePage 34 Memorandum 1800 Pioneer Creek Center, Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 763-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 To: Link Wilson, Kaas Wilson Architects From: James Benshoof and Aravind Gottemukkula Date: April 21, 2008 Subject: Parking Analysis for Wooddale Pointe Development PURPOSE The purpose of this memorandum is to determine whether the proposed Wooddale Pointe development will provide adequate parking supply to effectively meet expected demand. The proposed development consists of the following uses: • 155 residential dwelling units for senior citizens, divided as follows: 40 memory care units, 43 assisted living units, 72 catered living units • 8,000 SF (square feet) grocery store • 1,200 SF deli • 800 SF gift shop that will principally be used by residents • 1,000 SF hair salon that will principally be used by residents • 1,000 SF deli that is open only to residents (not open to public) Our parking analysis was based on data presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Parking Generation, Third Edition, 2004 and guidance presented in the Eno Foundation’s Parking, 1990. PARKING ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS The first step in our analysis was to determine the expected parking demand for the proposed development. Using data presented in the ITE Parking Generation, we determined parking demand for all uses within the proposed development. Results from the parking demand calculations are presented in Table 1. Table 1 Peak Parking Demand Calculations for Proposed Wooddale Pointe Development Use1 Size Unit Parking Demand No. of Spaces Residential2 155 DU 0.33 vehicles per unit 51 Grocery store 8,000 SF 4.36 vehicles per 1,000 sf 35 Deli 1,200 SF 8.2 vehicles per 1,000 sf 10 Gift shop and hair salon 1,800 SF 3.02 vehicles per 1,000 sf 5 TOTAL DEMAND 101 DU – dwelling unit, SF – square feet 1 The 1,000 SF Deli is not included in the parking analysis since it will not be open to public and thus, will not generate any parking demand by itself. 2 For residential uses, we used data for land use code 254 (Assisted Living). The ITE Parking Generation describes this use as “…residential settings that provide either routine general protective oversight or assistance with activities necessary for independent living to mentally or physically limited people.” Overall, the description for “Assisted Living” land use fits accurately with the proposed residential uses in the Wooddale Pointe development. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale Pointe Page 35 Memorandum to Link Wilson Subject: Parking Analysis for Wooddale Pointe Development Page 2 of 2 April 21, 2008 As presented in Table 1, the total peak parking demand for the proposed development is 101 spaces. Based on information presented in the Eno Foundation’s Parking, parking supply should be 10 percent greater than the expected parking demand. The 10 percent reserve capacity is “…needed to allow for cruising vehicles in search of a space, vehicles unparking, and for peak surges.” Thus, the total parking supply needed for the proposed development is 112 (101x1.1). The current concept plan for the proposed development provides a total of 175 parking spaces. Thus, the current plan for the proposed development will provide adequate parking supply to effectively meet expected demand. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale Pointe Page 36 Memorandum 1800 Pioneer Creek Center, Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 763-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 To: Link Wilson, Kaas Wilson Architects From: James Benshoof and Aravind Gottemukkula Date: April 18, 2008 Subject: Traffic Review for Proposed Wooddale Pointe Development in St. Louis Park PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The purpose of this memorandum is to present the results of our traffic review for the proposed Wooddale Pointe development in the City of St. Louis Park. The subject site is located in the southeast quadrant of the Wooddale Avenue S/36th Street W intersection. Our traffic review was to complete trip generation estimates for the proposed development and determine the associated changes in traffic volumes on Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street in the vicinity of the site. The proposed development consists of the following uses: • 155 residential dwelling units for senior citizens, divided as follows: o 40 memory care units o 43 assisted living units o 72 catered living units • 8,000 SF (square feet) grocery store • 1,200 SF deli • 800 SF gift shop that will principally be used by residents • 1,000 SF hair salon that will principally be used by residents • 1,000 SF deli that is open only to residents (not open to public) Access for the proposed development will be provided both via 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON WOODDALE AVENUE AND 36TH STREET To effectively address the percentage change in volumes that will be caused by the proposed development on Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street, it is necessary to establish background traffic volumes for these two streets. For this purpose, we obtained the memorandum report titled “Final Design of Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street Streetscaping Traffic Operations Analysis and Concept Layouts” that was completed by the SRF firm for the City of St. Louis Park on February 29, 2008. The SRF memorandum presents a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic volumes at multiple intersections along Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street in the vicinity of the site for 2008, 2012, and 2030 conditions. For the purpose of this traffic review, we used the 2012 traffic forecasts since this scenario represents conditions shortly after completion of the Wooddale Pointe development. We established two locations each on Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street for comparing volumes due to Wooddale Pointe to 2012 background volumes from the SRF report. Table 1 shows these four Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale Pointe Page 37 Memorandum to Link Wilson Subject: Traffic Review for Proposed Wooddale Pointe Development Page 2 of 3 April 18, 2008 locations and background volumes at each location for the 2012 conditions based on forecasts presented in the SRF report. Table 1 2012 Background Traffic Volumes on Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street Total Two-Way Traffic Volume Location A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Daily1 Wooddale Avenue just south of 36th Street 790 905 9,050 Wooddale Avenue just west of Highway 100 780 885 8,850 36th Street just east of Wooddale Avenue 1,035 1,520 15,200 36th Street just west of Highway 100 1,010 1,440 14,400 INCREASE IN TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON WOODDALE AVENUE AND 36TH STREET DUE TO PROPOED DEVELOPMENT To determine the increase in traffic volumes at the locations identified in Table 1 due to the proposed development, we first completed trip generation estimates. Our trip generation estimates were based on the characteristics of the proposed uses and data presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation, Seventh Edition, which is the current industry standard for developing gross trip generation. In addition to using the data in this document, we also used data presented in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook, Second Edition, which presents data on internal and passby trips. Internal trips are trips that will occur between two uses that are within the proposed development and thus, will not use the surrounding roadway network. Passby trips are trips that are already on Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street that will include a stop at the subject development in the future. Applying appropriate adjustments to the gross trips to account for internal and passby trips, we calculated the number of net new trips that will use the surrounding roadway network. Table 2 presents net new trip generation for the proposed development. Table 2 Net New Trip Generation for Proposed Wooddale Pointe Development A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Use2 Size Unit In Out Total In Out Total Daily Total Care Residential 155 DU 17 10 27 21 23 44 395 Grocery store 8,000 SF 9 6 15 26 24 50 487 Deli 1,200 SF 5 4 9 3 2 5 84 Gift shop and hair salon 1,800 SF 0 0 0 0 1 1 11 TOTAL 31 20 51 50 50 100 977 DU – dwelling unit, SF – square feet 1 Daily volumes were estimated based on the “rule of thumb” guideline that p.m. peak hour volume is approximately 10 percent of the daily volume. 2 The 1,000 SF Deli is not included in the trip generation estimates since it will not be open to public and thus, will not generate any external trips. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale Pointe Page 38 Memorandum to Link Wilson Subject: Traffic Review for Proposed Wooddale Pointe Development Page 3 of 3 April 18, 2008 To determine the traffic volume that the proposed development will add to Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street at the subject locations, the trips presented in Table 2 should be assigned to the surrounding roadway network. The trip assignment is based on expected travel patterns for the proposed development, which are described below: • Driveway on 36th Street o Trips to/from the east on 36th Street o Trips to/from the west on 36th Street o Trips to/from the north on Wooddale Avenue o Trips to/from the south on Wooddale Avenue • Driveway on Wooddale Avenue3 o Trips to/from the north on Wooddale Avenue o Trips to/from the south on Wooddale Avenue o Trips to/from the west on 36th Street The net new trips presented in Table 2 were assigned to the surrounding roadway network based on expected trip distribution for each of the above travel patterns. Table 3 presents the resultant development volumes on Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street at the subject locations: Table 3 Volumes due to Proposed Development on Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street Two-Way Traffic Volume (Associated Percent Increase Relative to 2012 Background Volume)4 Location A.M. Peak Hour P.M. Peak Hour Daily Wooddale Avenue just south of 36th Street 3 (0.4%) 5 (0.6%) 49 (0.5%) Wooddale Avenue just west of Highway 100 18 (2.3%) 35 (4.0%) 343 (3.9%) 36th Street just east of Wooddale Avenue 12 (1.2%) 24 (1.6%) 235 (1.6%) 36th Street just west of Highway 100 20 (2.0%) 40 (2.8%) 391 (2.7%) Based on the results presented in Table 3, the proposed development will cause no perceptible changes in traffic volumes on Wooddale Avenue or 36th Street. 3 All trips to/from the east on 36th Street are expected to use the access on 36th Street. 4 Traffic volume shown is total volume for both directions at the subject location. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8a) Subject: PUD - Wooddale Pointe Page 39 Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 8b Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments POLICY CONSIDERATION: Consider a change to require conditional use permits (CUPs) for educational uses, religious uses, currency exchanges and firearms sales; clarify additional height allowances for communication towers; provide consistency with state law for published notice requirements; provide consistency that all temporary uses and structures; and prohibit bars, grills, mesh or similar obstructions on windows and doors. Also, does Council want to make the changes regarding the communication towers or remove those changes as recommended by the Planning Commission? BACKGROUND: Through the course of the spring, staff has been working on several amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. Many of the amendments are minor changes needed for consistency and clarification. Some of the changes, however, would result in an amendment to current policy and regulations. The more substantial changes include amendments to residential districts to change educational and religious uses from permitted with conditions to permitted with conditional use permit (CUP), regulating currency exchange, firearms sales and payday loan businesses, and architectural standards. Update from Planning Commission meeting of 7/2/08: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the amendments on May 7, 2008 and July 2, 2008. The Planning Commission recommended all amendments with the exception of Section 36- 78 “Height limitations.” The Commission recommended denial of the changes to clarify the allowances for communication towers. Staff recommends adoption of the 1st reading of the proposed zoning text amendments (which includes changes to the communication towers). SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: Sec. 36-34. Zoning text amendments. Notice for zoning text changes – amend to be consistent with state law requirements of published notice once required at least 10 days prior to the hearing. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 2 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments Sec. 36-78. Height limitations. Amend to clarify that the maximum height for communication towers can be increased up to 50% above the height limitations stated in individual zoning districts, through the Conditional Use Permit process. Sec. 36-82. Temporary uses. Provide consistency that all temporary uses and structures (exception for agricultural commodities) are allowed for a maximum of 14 days. 36-142 (d) Commercial uses. Add “colleges” to business/trade school description. Sec. 36-163. R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and RC residential districts. Educational and Religious Institutions: The proposed amendment would require educational facilities and religious institutions to obtain a conditional use permit (CUP) in residential zoning districts. A CUP requires a public hearing and notification of property owners within 350 feet of the parcel. The standards and requirements for these uses would remain the same. Sec. 36-194. C-2 general commercial district. Currency exchange, payday loan agencies and firearms sales: The proposed zoning ordinance would allow currency exchange, payday loan agencies and firearms sales in the General Commercial (C-2) District with a conditional use permit (CUP). In addition to the CUP, these uses would be required to meet several conditions specific to them, including setbacks from each other and sensitive uses such as pawn shops and sexually oriented businesses. Additional setbacks are also required from residential properties, schools, religious and similar uses. 36-366 Architectural design. Standards for building design to prohibit bars, grills, mesh or similar obstructions on exterior doors or window or contiguous window area. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: N/A VISION CONSIDERATION: These changes address the 18-month strategic direction that “St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community” with the “aim toward increasing and strengthening neighborhoods.” Attachments: Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 3 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments ORDINANCE NO.______ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTIONS 36-34, 36-78, 36-82, 36-142, 36-163, 36-164, 36-165, 36-166, 36-167, 36-193, 36-194, 36-223, 36-243, 36-244, 36-366 THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 08-08-ZA and 08-23-ZA). Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 36-34, 36-78, 36-82, 36-142, 36-163, 36- 164, 36-165, 36-166, 36-167, 36-193, 36-194, 36-223, 36-243, 36-244, 36-366 is hereby amended by deleting striken language and adding underscored language. Section breaks are represented by ***. Zoning Ordinance Amendments Sec. 36-34. Amendments. (b) Additional requirements for amendments changing zoning districts and boundaries *** (4) Zoning text changes. A zoning text change shall require published notice of the public hearing for two consecutive weeks as required in subsection (b)(3) of this section. [renumber accordingly] *** (c) Special procedure for comprehensive rezoning *** (2) Notice. The city clerk shall publish notice in at least three weekly issues of the official newspaper of the city at least on the proposed rezoning amendment. The hearing shall be held not less than ten or more than 15 days after the publication prior to the date of the hearing. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 4 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments *** Sec. 36-78. Height limitations. (a) Height limitations set forth elsewhere in this ordinance shall be increased by 50 percent when applied to the following structures: (5) Communication towers. The fifty (50) percent increase shall only be allowed Heights in excess of those allowed under this section shall be permitted only by a conditional use permit granted by resolution of the city council determining that such structure would not be dangerous and would not adversely affect adjoining or adjacent property. This determination will be made based on the following conditions: a. Distance from abutting residential property. b. Tower design and collapse radius. c. Aesthetic considerations such as color and design. *** Sec. 36-82. Temporary uses. *** (b) Authorized temporary uses. A structure or land in any use district may be used for one or more of the following temporary uses if the use complies with the conditions stated in this chapter: *** (3) Temporary structures. a. Temporary construction structures are regulated under Section 36-82(b)(1). ab. Temporary structures shall not be permitted for a period of time exceeding six months per calendar year, except that Ttemporary structures used for the storage of vehicles, equipment or other household items shall not be permitted for more than 14 days per calendar year, on any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential. with the exception of temporary structures allowed under “agricultural commodities.” bc. No significant trees shall be removed for the placement of a temporary structure. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 5 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments c. Temporary structures may be located within required yards, but not within 15 feet of any public right-of-way or where prohibited under section 36-76. d. Any other landscaping materials which are displaced by the temporary structure shall be replaced upon removal of the temporary structure. *** (5) Temporary outdoor sales. c. Temporary sales which exceed 100 square feet shall be permitted for a period not to exceed four consecutive days or a total of 12 14 days in a calendar year except in public parks or closed right-of-way as approved by the city or as specified by PUD approval. (6) Agricultural commodities--Not more than 45 90 days. b. Agricultural commodities shall be permitted on a parcel for not more than 45 90 days within any calendar year. c. Tents, stands and other similar temporary structures may be utilized, provided they are clearly identified on the plan reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator. The use shall not impair parking capacity, emergency access, or the safe and efficient movement of pedestrian and vehicular traffic on or off the site. *** 36-142 (d) Commercial uses. The following are typical of the commercial uses referred to in this chapter. *** (7) Business/trade school/college means a training establishment or institution facility serving adults and sometimes high school age persons which provides training and/or specialized education toward a skill, license or degree. to develop a skill to prepare for a specific job. Equipment or processing which simulate an industrial or commercial work setting may be included. *** (30) Service means on-site service provided directly to an individual. This use includes barbershops, beauty shops, massage parlors, therapeutic massage, laundromats, shoe repair shops, and dry cleaners where articles to be cleaned are picked up and delivered by the patron. This use excludes pawnshops. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 6 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments *** Sec. 36-163. R-1 single-family residence district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-1 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated in section 36-162 and those specified for the use in this subsection. *** (3) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. *** (7) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located at least 30 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R district. b. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. [renumber accordingly] *** (d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in any R-1 district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with the requirements of all the general conditions provided in section 36-365 and with the specific conditions imposed in this subsection. *** (3) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from a lot in an R district. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 7 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. *** (6) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located at least 30 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. [renumber alphabetically accordingly] *** Sec. 36-164. R-2 single-family residence district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-2 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated in section 36-162 and those specified for the use permitted in this subsection. *** (3) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located a minimum of 50 feet from a lot in an R district. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 8 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from any lot in an R district. *** (7) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R district. b. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. [renumber accordingly] *** (d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in any R-2 district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with the requirements of all the general conditions provided in section 36-365(b) and with the specific conditions imposed in this subsection and such other conditions as may be imposed by the city council under section 36-34(b). *** (2) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. *** Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 9 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments (4) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located at least 30 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. [renumber accordingly] *** Sec. 36-165. R-3 two-family residence district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-3 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the conditions stated in section 36-162 and those specified for the use in this subsection (c):. *** (4) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. *** (8) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located at least 30 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R district. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 10 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments b. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. [renumber accordingly] *** (d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in any R-3 district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with the residential restrictions and performance standards of section 36-162, all the general conditions provided in section 36-365, the specific conditions imposed in this subsection (d) and such other conditions as may be imposed by the city council under subsection (b) of section 36-34. *** (2) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. *** (3) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located at least 30 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 11 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments c. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. [renumber alphabetically accordingly] *** Sec. 36-166. R-4 multiple-family residence district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-4 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with the residential restrictions and performance standards of section 36-162 and those conditions specified for the use in this subsection (c):. *** (6) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located a minimum of 50 feet from a lot in an R district, unless approved as a conditional use. b. An off-street school bus pickup and dropoff area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from any lot in an R district. *** (10) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from any lot in an R district. b. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. [renumber accordingly] *** (d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in any R-4 district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with the requirements of all the general conditions provided in section 36-365 and with the specific Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 12 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments conditions imposed in this subsection (d) and such other conditions as may be imposed by the city council under section 36-34(b). *** (2) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. *** (4) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located at least 30 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. *** (8) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. The school is limited to 20 or fewer students; and b. The school is limited to grades k-8. c. An off-street school bus pickup and dropoff area shall be provided in order to Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 13 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. d. The school property shall not adjoin any R-1, R-2 or R-3 property that is used or subdivided for residential. e. The school building must be residential in character. *** [renumber accordingly] Sec. 36-167. R-C high-density multiple-family residence district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in an R-C district may be used for one or more of the following uses if it complies with the residential restrictions and performance standards of section 36-162 and with those specified for the use in this subsection:. *** (6) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located a minimum of 50 feet from a lot in an R district. b. An off-street school bus pickup and dropoff area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Conditions listed in subsections ©(6)a. through (c)(6)c. of this section and certain performance standards may be waived or amended if so specified in a redevelopment plan for the area that has been adopted as part of the city comprehensive plan. e. The property shall be designated for civic or civic-mixed use in the comprehensive plan. *** (10) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from any lot in an R district. b. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 14 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments generating significant traffic on local residential streets. c. Conditions listed in subsections (c)(10)a. and (c)(10)b. of this section and certain performance standards may be waived or amended if so specified in a redevelopment plan for the area that has been adopted as part of the city comprehensive plan. d. The property shall be designated for civic or civic-mixed use in the comprehensive plan. [renumber accordingly] *** (d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in any R-C district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with the residential restrictions and performance standards of section 36-162, the general conditions of section 36-367, and with the specific conditions imposed in this subsection as follows: *** (1) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. Buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. *** (7) Religious institutions. The conditions are as follows: a. All buildings shall be located at least 30 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R district. b. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain vehicular and pedestrian safety. c. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 15 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments R district. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. [renumber alphabetically accordingly] Sec. 36-193. C-1 neighborhood commercial district. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in a C-1 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with conditions stated in section 36-192, and those specified for the use in this subsection (c). None of the following uses shall exceed intensity classification 4, except by conditional use permit:. *** (33) Business/trade schools/college. The condition for business/trade schools is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4. *** (d) Conditional uses. No structure or land in a C-1 district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. These uses shall comply with the commercial restrictions and performance standards of section 36-192, the requirements of all the general conditions provided in section 36-365, with the specific conditions imposed in this subsection (d), and with any other conditions the city council may impose. *** Sec. 36-194. C-2 general commercial district. *** (b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the C-2 district if the use complies with the commercial restrictions and performance standards of section 36-192:. *** (8) Business and trade schools. Business/trade school/college. *** (d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in a C-2 district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. Those uses shall comply with the commercial restrictions and performance standards of section 36-192, all those general conditions Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 16 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments provided in section 36-367 and with the specific conditions imposed in this subsection (d), and with any other conditions which may be imposed by the city council. *** (16) Payday loan agency and currency exchange: a. The lot must be at least 1,000 feet from the property line of a site containing a pawnshop, currency exchange, payday loan agency, firearms sales, liquor store or sexually-oriented business. In the case of a shopping center or multi-use building, the distance shall be measured from the portion of the center or building occupied by the payday loan agency or currency exchange. b. The use shall not operate in conjunction with a sexually-oriented business. c. The lot shall be located a minimum of 350 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential, or has an educational (academic) use, religious institution, park, library or community center. In the case of a shopping center or multi-use building, the distance shall be measured from the portion of the center or building occupied by the use. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial. Access to and from local residential streets is prohibited. e. In-vehicle sales or service are prohibited. f. The use shall be contained within a completely enclosed building. g. Exterior loudspeakers or public address systems are prohibited. h. Windows must be of clear, transparent glass and be free of obstructions for at least three feet into the store. Product may be displayed in the window as long as the display, including signage, does not occupy more than 30 percent of the window area. i. Neon accents and back-lighted awnings shall be prohibited. (17) Firearms sales: a. The lot must be at least 1,000 feet from the property line of a site containing a pawnshop, currency exchange, payday loan agency, liquor store or sexually-oriented business. In the case of a shopping center or multi-use building, the distance shall be Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 17 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments measured from the portion of the center or building occupied by the payday loan agency or currency exchange. b. The use shall not operate in conjunction with a sexually-oriented business. c. The lot shall be located a minimum of 350 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential, or has an educational (academic) use, religious institution, park, library or community center. In the case of a shopping center or multi-use building, the distance shall be measured from the portion of the center or building occupied by the use. d. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial. Access to and from local residential streets is prohibited. e. In-vehicle sales or service are prohibited. f. The use shall be contained within a completely enclosed building. g. Exterior loudspeakers or public address systems are prohibited. h. Windows must be of clear, transparent glass and be free of obstructions for at least three feet into the store. Product may be displayed in the window as long as the display, including signage, does not occupy more than 30 percent of the window area. i. Neon accents and back-lighted awnings shall be prohibited. *** Sec. 36-223. O office district. *** (b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the O district, if the use complies with the office restrictions and performance standards of section 36-222:. *** (4) Business and trade schools. Business/trade school/college. *** Sec. 36-243. I-P industrial park district. *** Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 18 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments (b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an I-P district if the use complies with the industrial restrictions and performance standards of section 36-242:. *** (4) Business and trade schools. Business/trade school/college. *** Sec. 36-244. I-G general industrial district. *** (b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in an I-G district if that use complies with the industrial restrictions and performance standards of section 36-242:. *** (4) Business and trade schools. Business/trade school/college. *** 36-366 Architectural design *** (b) Standards. (1) Building Design. *** h. Interior and exterior bars, grills, mesh or similar obstructions, whether permanently or temporarily affixed, shall not cover any exterior door or more than ten percent of any individual window or contiguous window area. Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case Files 08-08-ZA and 08-23-ZA are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing May 21, 2008 First Reading July 7, 2008 Second Reading Date of Publication Date Ordinance takes effect Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8b) Page 19 Subject: 1st Reading of Zoning Ordinance Amendments Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 8c Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: RNC Joint Powers Agreement RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the Joint Powers Agreement regarding Public Safety related to the 2008 Republican National Convention. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to authorize the hiring of St. Louis Park Police officers by the City of Saint Paul to assist with security related concerns during the Republican National Convention in the City of Saint Paul. BACKGROUND: The City of Saint Paul will be hosting the Republican National Convention between the dates of September 1-5, 2008. The Saint Paul Police Department has requested that law enforcement agencies from throughout the state assist in identifying personnel who would be interested in working on security related details. Eight members of the St. Louis Park Police Department have expressed a desire to work on this detail. In addition to earning some extra money, there are two primary reasons why members of our department have responded to this request. First, this is in many ways similar to the mutual aid requests which are common among police agencies whenever circumstances or events require more resources than are available in a given jurisdiction. It is clear that even using the most optimistic estimates for the number of officers expressing interest in this detail, the demand for security related personnel will strain and may even exceed the supply. It should be noted that the Saint Paul Police Department has always been very generous in responding to requests for assistance throughout the metro area and has a reputation for being a first class major city police department. Second, our officers view this event as an opportunity to work in an environment that is unique and interesting; perhaps not a once in a lifetime event, but something similar to that. The following points of clarification may be considered in evaluating this request: • Officers will be off-duty and staffing/service levels for our community would not be affected. • Additional duty requests for St. Louis Park police officers in our host hotels and additional patrol staffing related to the temporary 4:00 a.m. liquor license extension can also be met without affecting our normal staffing/service levels. • The JPA provides 1.5 times the officer’s normal hourly rate, 1.45% Medicare, 12.9% pension (PERA) and has been reviewed by our Finance Director. Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Page 2 Subject: Republican National Convention Joint Agreement • St. Louis Park police officers will work in teams with each other on their detail and will be assigned a liaison from the Saint Paul Police Department. • St. Louis Park police officers will not be assigned to the rapid response teams whose task will be responding to protests involving civil disobedience and disruption. The JPA has been reviewed by our City Attorney’s office and a letter from our City Attorney is attached. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None VISION CONSIDERATION: None Attachments: Letters from Campbell Knutson and League of Minnesota Cities Joint Powers Agreement Regarding Public Safety Related to 2008 RNC Prepared by: John D. Luse, Chief of Police Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 3 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 4 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 5 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 6 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 7 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 8 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 9 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 10 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 11 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 12 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 13 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 14 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 15 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 16 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 17 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 18 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 19 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 20 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 21 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 22 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 23 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 24 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 25 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 26 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 27 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8c) Subject: Republican National Committee Joint Powers Agreement Page 28 Meeting Date: July 7, 2008 Agenda Item #: 8d Regular Meeting Public Hearing Action Item Consent Item Resolution Ordinance Presentation Other: EDA Meeting Action Item Resolution Other: Study Session Discussion Item Written Report Other: TITLE: Project Report: Traffic Signal Projects – Louisiana Avenue at Oxford Street, Louisiana Avenue at Louisiana Circle - Project No. 2009-2000 and Project No. 2009-2001. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Motion to Adopt Resolution accepting this report, establishing and ordering Improvement Project No. 2009-2000 and Project No. 2009-2001, approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids. Motion to adopt resolution authorizing installation of “No Parking” restrictions on Oxford Street near the intersection of Louisiana Avenue as part of the Traffic Signal Project, City Project No. 2009-2000. Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute an agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and Methodist Hospital which provides for the installation and maintenance of a traffic signal at the intersection of Louisiana Avenue and Louisiana Circle. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None. BACKGROUND: History At their August 6, 2007 meeting, City Council approved a Major Amendment to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Park Nicollet at their Methodist Hospital Campus at 6500 Excelsior Boulevard. The Major Amendment allows for construction of the Frauenshuh Cancer Center and a new 5 level parking ramp. The Methodist Hospital expansion will generate addition traffic to the site resulting in increased traffic along Louisiana Avenue. A 2007 traffic study prepared by SRF Consulting Group shows that the additional trips to the campus site, generated by the parking ramp and building addition, will cause the intersection at Oxford Street and Louisiana Avenue to operate at an unacceptable level of service. The traffic study recommends replacing the four way stop condition at the intersection with a permanent traffic signal system to provide acceptable operations. As a result, the signal was programmed into the CIP for construction in 2009. Earlier this year Park Nicollet officials requested the city install the signal system at Oxford Street to coincide with the opening of the new Methodist Hospital parking ramp in the fall of 2008. In addition to the signal at Oxford Street, Park Nicollet officials also requested the city study the intersection of Louisiana Circle and Louisiana Avenue at the main hospital entrance to determine if signal control was needed there as well. Park Nicollet expressed their desire for adding signal control Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Page 2 Subject: Traffic Signal Projects – Louisiana Avenue at their entrance to improve pedestrian safety and to better facilitate traffic from Louisiana Avenue to their new parking ramp. The City hired, SRF Consulting Group, to begin preparing plans for a signal system at the intersection of Oxford Street and Louisiana Avenue so construction could begin in the summer to a fall 2008 completion date. SRF was also asked to study the intersection at Louisiana Circle/Hospital Entrance and Louisiana Avenue to determine traffic control needs. The study was quickly completed and it was concluded, based on signal warrant guidelines, that traffic signal control is not warranted at the Louisiana Circle/Hospital Entrance intersection. However, based on Park Nicollet’s concern for overall pedestrian safety and convenience, they expressed their desire for the signal and a willingness to pay for 100% of the costs. City engineering staff met with Park Nicollet to discuss installing the Louisiana Circle/Hospital Entrance signal in conjunction with the Oxford signal so that both signals could be operational by Fall 2008. The terms for designing, installing and operating the new signals are based on the conditions agreed to in the City / Methodist 2003 PUD Development Contract. The contract provides that Park Nicollet pay for 50% of the signal costs at Louisiana Avenue and Oxford Street and 100% of the signal costs at Louisiana Avenue and Louisiana Circle/Hospital Entrance. An agreement has been prepared by the City Attorney which establishes responsibilities for the design, installation, operation and maintenance of the Louisiana Circle/Hospital Entrance signal (attachment). Signal Systems SRF Consulting Group has completed plans for both signal systems. Both signal systems will have permanent poles, mast arms and light systems. Due to their close proximity the signals will be interconnected and operated by a master controller to provide peak operation. Both signals will have Emergency Vehicle Preemption systems to allow control by police, fire and ambulance vehicles. New crosswalks and lane striping will be installed with the signal construction. The attached layouts depict the lane assignments for each intersection. Mn/DOT State Aid Requirements Louisiana Avenue and Oxford Street are both designated as Municipal State Aid (MSA) routes. MSA funds will be used for the city’s share of the signal costs. As a result, the signal design must meet Mn/DOT State Aid design standards. To meet Mn/DOT’s design standards for lane configuration and lane width, it will be necessary to restrict parking along Oxford Street in the approach lanes 200 feet back from the Louisiana Avenue intersection (see attached layout). Mn/DOT has reviewed and approved the signal plans for construction. Public Process Notices were sent on May 20, 2008 to the business operators and property owners near the intersections of the proposed new signals. The letter explained the signal project and the need to restrict parking on Oxford Street near the Louisiana Avenue intersection. The letter also solicited comments about the proposed project and provided an invitation to view preliminary plans. Only one property owner responded to the letter. The owner commented that street parking on Oxford Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Page 3 Subject: Traffic Signal Projects – Louisiana Avenue near the intersection is a problem and should be banned. The owner also thought that a signal at Oxford is only needed during the peak traffic hours and that there currently isn’t a need for a signal at the Hospital entrance. The last comment was about observing traffic back ups to Oxford Street from the signals at Hwy 7 and that they may impede the new signal at Oxford. Staff responded to the owner to address the comments. Project Timeline: Should the City Council approve the Project Report, it is anticipated that the following schedule can be met: • Approval of Plans/Authorization to Bid by City Council July 7, 2008 • Advertise for bids July 2008 • Bid Opening July 28, 2008 • Bid Tab Report to City Council; Award contract August 4, 2008 • Begin Construction Mid-August, 2008 • Project Completion November, 2008 FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: These projects were planned for and included in the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program (C.I.P.). The total estimated costs and funding for the signal at Oxford Street and Louisiana Avenue is as follows: Estimated Costs (project 20092000) Construction Cost $ 226,000 Contingencies $ 17,000 Engineering & Administrative $ 20,000 Total $ 263,000 Funding Sources Amount Mn/DOT MSA Funds $ 131,500 Methodist Hospital $ 131,500 The total estimated costs and funding for the Louisiana Circle/Hospital entrance signal is as follows: Estimated Costs (project 20092100) Construction Cost $ 229,000 Contingencies $ 17,000 Engineering & Administrative $ 20,000 Total $ 277,000 Funding Sources Amount Methodist Hospital $ 277,000 Funding for the signals is based on the PUD Development Contract with Methodist Hospital. Methodist Hospital is responsible for 50% of the cost of the Oxford Signal and 100% of the cost of Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Page 4 Subject: Traffic Signal Projects – Louisiana Avenue the Louisiana Circle/Hospital Entrance signal. The attached agreement, prepared by the City Attorney, provides that Methodist Hospital will be responsible for the costs associated with the design, installation, and future operations and maintenance of the Louisiana Circle/Hospital Entrance signal. VISION CONSIDERATION: In reviewing this item, it falls in line with our Vision: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. Specifically as it relates to installing a signal to help with pedestrian safety. Attachments: Resolution Authorizing Project Approval Resolution Authorizing Parking Restrictions Agreement Project Location Map Oxford Signal Intersection Layout Louisiana Circle/Hospital Entrance Signal Intersection Layout Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Scott Brink, City Engineer Mike Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Page 5 Subject: Traffic Signal Projects – Louisiana Avenue RESOLUTION NO. 08-_______ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE PROJECT REPORT, ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2009-2000 AND 2009-2001, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2009-2000 AND 2009-2001 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report related to the Traffic Signal Projects, City Project No. 2009-2000 and 2009-2001. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1. The Project Report regarding Project No. 2009-2000 and Project No. 2009-2001 is hereby accepted. 2. Such improvement as proposed is necessary, cost effective, and feasible as detailed in the Project Report. 3. The proposed project, designated as Project No. 2009-2000 and Project No. 2009-2001, is hereby established and ordered. 4. The plans and specifications for the making of the improvement, as prepared under the direction of the City Engineer, or designee, are approved. 5. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least two weeks in the official newspaper and at least one week in the Construction Bulletin, an advertisement for bids for the making of said improvement under said-approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall appear not less than ten (10) days prior to the date and time of receipt of bids, and specify the work to be done, state the date and time bids will be received by the City Clerk, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a bid bond payable to the City for five (5) percent of the amount of the bid. 6. The City Engineer, or designee, shall report the receipt of bids to the City Council shortly after the letting date. The report shall include a tabulation of the bid results and a recommendation to the City Council. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Page 6 Subject: Traffic Signal Projects – Louisiana Avenue RESOLUTION NO. 08-_______ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION OF “NO PARKING” RESTRICTIONS AT CERTAIN LOCATIONS ALONG OXFORD STREET AS PART OF THE CITY’S CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, C.P. NO. 2009-2000 AND S.A.P. NO. 163-276-034 WHEREAS, the “City”, has planned the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Louisiana Avenue and Oxford Street; and WHEREAS, Oxford Street does not provide adequate width for parking near the intersection of Louisiana with the proposed lane configuration needed for the new signal installation; and WHEREAS, the “City” will be expending Municipal Street Aid Funds on the traffic signal; and WHEREAS, approval of the proposed traffic signal as a Municipal State Aid project must meet certain design requirements including proper lane configuration and adequate lane width and must therefore be conditioned upon certain parking restrictions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to install “No Parking” restrictions for Oxford Street in conjunction with the signal install at the following locations: • Along the north side of Oxford Street from Louisiana Avenue east 200 feet. • Along the south side of Oxford Street from Louisiana Avenue west 200 feet. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 7, 2008 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Subject: Traffic Signal Projects - Louisiana Avenue Page 7 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Subject: Traffic Signal Projects - Louisiana Avenue Page 8 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Subject: Traffic Signal Projects - Louisiana Avenue Page 9 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Subject: Traffic Signal Projects - Louisiana Avenue Page 10 Meeting of July 7, 2008 (Item No. 8d) Subject: Traffic Signal Projects - Louisiana Avenue Page 11