HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/02/21 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
February 21, 2006
7:30 PM
6:15 p.m. Boards and Commission Interviews –Boxed Lunches
7:00 p.m. EDA Meeting
7:30 p.m. City Council Meeting
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
2b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
3. Approval of Minutes
Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented
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.
Action: Motion to approve the agenda as presented and to approve items listed 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
5a. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions
Recommended
Action:
Motion to appoint two citizen representatives to the Police
Advisory Commission.
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing to Consider Allocation of 2006 Community Development Block
Grant Funds (CDBG) and Proposed Reallocation of $57,500 of 2004 CDBG
Funds
Resolution approving the proposed use of $213,302 of 2006 Urban Hennepin County
CDBG Funds, reallocation of 2004 funds, and authorizing execution of Subrecipient
Agreement with Hennepin County and any related Third Party Agreements.
Recommended
Action:
Mayor to close the public hearing. Motion to adopt the Resolution
approving proposed use of funds for 2006 Urban Hennepin
County Community Development Block Grant funds, reallocation
of 2004 funds, and authorizing execution of Subrecipient
Agreement with Hennepin County and any related Third Party
Agreements
6b. Public Hearing - Modification of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Finance
District Plan to include the Hoigaard Village Project.
This report considers a resolution adopting the Modification to the Redevelopment
Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and a Modification to the Tax Increment
Financing Plan for the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District to include
the proposed Hoigaard Village project site.
Recommended
Action:
Open / close Public Hearing.
Motion to approve the resolution adopting the Modification to the
Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and a
Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
8a. Granite City Food and Brewery – Major Amendment to a Planned Unit
Development (Tower Place PUD)
Case No. 05-75-PUD
Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving a major amendment for
changes to the building footprint at 5500 Excelsior Blvd.
(Timberlodge Steakhouse, now known as Granite City Food and
Brewery), subject to conditions in the resolution.
8b. Police Officer Union Contract: January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2006
A one year agreement between the City and the Police Officers Union for 2006.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor Services
(LELS) Local #206, establishing terms and conditions of
employment for one year, from 1/1/06 – 12/31/06.
8c. International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 49 Union Contract:
January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2007
A two year agreement between the City and the IUOE Union for 2006 and 2007.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and the International Union of
Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local #49, establishing terms and
conditions of employment for two years, from 1/1/06 – 12/31/07.
8d. Public Safety Dispatcher Union Contract: January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2007
A two year agreement between the City and the Dispatchers Union for 2006 and 2007.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor Services
(LELS) Local #220, establishing terms and conditions of
employment for two years, from 1/1/06 – 12/31/07.
9. Communications
10. Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make
arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD
952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL
MEETING OF February 21, 2006
SECTION 4: CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no
discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a
member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion.
4a. Motion to designate B.J. Haines Tree Service as the lowest responsible bidder and
authorize execution of a contract for the 2006 Boulevard Tree and Stump Removal
Program in an amount not to exceed $118,286.00.
4b. Motion to designate B.J. Haines Tree Service as the lowest responsible bidder and
authorize execution of a contract for the 2006 private diseased tree removal program
in an amount not to exceed $166,635.50.
4c. Motion to approve transfer of $280,000 from the Permanent Improvement
Revolving (PIR) Fund to the Wireless Enterprise Fund
4d. Motion to approve Resolutions authorizing Gambling Premises Permit for
Community Charities of Minnesota operating at : Park Tavern Lanes & Lounge,
3401 Louisiana Ave. and TexaTonka Lanes, 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard
4e. Motion to approve Resolution for a variance to allow an addition for the property
located at 2537 Inglewood Ave. S. John White applicant Case No. 05-68-VAR
4f. Motion to authorize the execution of the REBA (Retirement Enhancement and
Benefit Alternatives Program) Joint Powers Agreement.
4g. Motion to accept Resolution for Final Payment to Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. for
Random Curb and Gutter. City Project No. 2005-0004 Contract No. 121-05
4h. Motion to accept Resolution for Final Payment toValley Paving, Inc. for 2005 MSA
Street Rehabilitation Project. City Project No. 2004-1100 Contract No. 77-05
4i. Motion to adapt Resolution requesting the Minnesota Department of Transportation
to grant a variance from Municipal State Aid Standards – Quentin Avenue from
Excelsior Boulevard to Wooddale Avenue. Project 2006-1100
4j. Motion to approve a resolution supporting the Nurturing Our Retired Citizens’
(NORC) grant application to the Minnesota Department of Human Services
4k. Motion to accept Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of November
16, 2005 for filing
4l. Motion to accept Fire Civil Service Commission Minutes of August 3, 2005 for filing
4m. Motion to accept Housing Authority Minutes of January 11, 2006 for filing
4n. Motion to accept Planning Commission Minutes of January 18, 2006 for filing
4o. Motion to accept Telecommunication Minutes of December 8, 2005 for filing
4p. Motion to accept vendor claims for filing. (supplement)
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
***February 21, 2006***
Items contained in this section are those items
which are not yet available in electronic format
and which are identified in the individual
reports by inclusion of the word “Supplement”.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 1
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
February 6, 2006
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm.
Council members present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, C. Paul Carver, Phil Finkelstein,
Loran Paprocki and Susan Sanger
Councilmember Paul Omodt was absent.
Staff present: Associate Planner (Mr. Fulton), City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney
(Mr. Scott), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Director of Inspections (Mr.
Hoffman), Director of Parks & Rec. (Ms. Walsh), Housing Program Coordinator (Ms. Larsen),
Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Stegora-
Peterson).
2. Presentations - None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. City Council Minutes of December 19, 2005
Councilmember Finkelstein indicated on page twelve, second paragraph (regarding
PPL); replace “agreement” with “negotiation process.”
The minutes were approved as corrected.
3b. Study Session Minutes of January 9, 2006
The minutes were approved as submitted.
3c. City Council Minutes of January 17, 2006
Councilmember Sanger indicated on page 12, the motion was passed on a 4-1 vote, but
six people were present.
Councilmember Basill believed Councilmember Omodt might have stepped out of the
room when the vote was taken.
Councilmember Sanger asked the minutes reflect that.
The minutes were approved as corrected.
3d. Study Session Minutes of January 23, 2006
Councilmember Finkelstein noted under Item 4, paragraph five, end of first sentence, add
“but with no commitment at this point in time as to when they would start the public
process on the sidewalk. They needed to see what other projects were first in line.”
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 2
Councilmember Sanger stated under Item 3, first paragraph, to clarify the pedestrian
crossing “at Ottawa Avenue.”
The minutes were approved as corrected.
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine
and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is
desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an
appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion.
4a. Authorize staff to execute an Agreement with Unplugged Cities related to
partnership to deliver Broadband Access and Public Safety and Service
Applications over a Meshed Wireless Network in an amount not to exceed
$26,000.
4b. Item was removed.
4c. Adopt Agreement between the Friends of the Arts and the City of St. Louis Park.
4d. Approve Resolution No. 06-017 establishing a special assessment for the
installation of a fire suppression sprinkler system at 4300 36½ Street, St. Louis
Park, MN 55416, rescinding Resolution No. 04-143 adopted December 6, 2004.
4e. Approve Resolution No. 06-018 establishing a special assessment for the
installation of a fire suppression sprinkler system at 4003 Wooddale Avenue, St.
Louis Park, MN.
4f. Approve Resolution No. 06-024 for year 2006 Liquor License Renewals for
license year to run March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2007.
4g. Adopt Resolution No. 06-025 approving a minor amendment to a Planned Unit
Development (Tower Place PUD) for exterior changes at 5500 Excelsior Blvd.
(Timberlodge Steakhouse, now known as Granite City Food and Brewery). Case
No. 05-75-CUP
4h. Approve Resolution No. 06-026 to designate Marcia Honold as the Deputy City
Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk.
4i. Approve a Resolution No. 06-021 supporting the City of St. Louis Park’s
application to the Minnesota Housing and Finance Agency (MHFA) for
assistance in funding the citywide inspection “home rehab program.
4j. Adopt Resolution No.’s 06-028 through 06-037 Imposing Civil Penalties for
Liquor License Violations according to the recommendation of the City
Manager.
4k. Approve Resolution No. 06-038 for Final Payment to Cool Air Mechanical for
replacement of HVAC. City Project No. 2005-1600 Contract No. 112-05
4l. Designate Rainbow Tree Care, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and to
authorize execution of a contract for the 2006 Arbotect 20-S Elm injection
program at a cost of $12.15 per diameter inch.
4m. Accept Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2005 for filing.
4n. Accept Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of October 27, 2005 for filing.
4o. Accept Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of January 5, 2006 for filing.
4p. Accept Human Rights Commission Minutes of November 16, 2005 for filing.
4q. Accept Human Rights Commission Minutes of December 21, 2005 for filing.
4r. Accept Planning Commission Minutes of December 21, 2005 for filing.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 3
4s. Accept Planning Commission Minutes of January 4, 2006 for filing.
4t. Accept vendor claims for filing (supplement).
It was moved by Councilmember Finkelstein, seconded by Councilmember Carver, to approve
the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar.
The motion passed 6-0.
5. Boards and Commissions
5a. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions
Mayor Jacobs thanked those who served on the boards and commissions.
It was moved by Councilmember Finkelstein, seconded by Councilmember Carver to
appoint the following citizen representatives:
Commission Appointed Member Term Expires
Planning Commission Richard Person December 31, 2006
CEAC - Community Education
Advisory Council
Joe Tatalovich June 30, 2008
PRAC – Parks and Recreation
Advisory Commission
George Hagmund December 31, 2007
Nick Magrino – youth member December 31, 2007
PAC – Police Advisory
Commission
Richard Markgraf December 31, 2006
HRC – Human Rights
Commission
Mindy Green December 31, 2006
The motion passed 6-0.
Councilmember Finkelstein noted they had additional openings and were doing more
interviews.
Mayor Jacobs added there were additional opening on the Human Rights. If interested,
contact the City Clerk’s Office.
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing to consider an appeal of the Board of Zoning Appeals denial
(2-2 vote) of a variance from the Zoning Ordinance to allow an addition.
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing.
John White, applicant, stated a goal of the Council is to promote a balanced and
sustainable housing stock to meet diverse needs including remodels which add more
bedrooms, more bathrooms, 2+ garages, which they were trying to do. Their lot width is
80’, five feet under the minimum lot size. If they deducted the setbacks and the width
of the house, it left a balance of 1.7’. There were concerns the long wall would look like
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 4
a fortress. It would not be visible to people driving by or looking from the South. They
would put in shrubbery to break up the wall. They needed to maximize the value of
their property and make it more comfortable. They had a hardship because they had
spent a great deal of time and money to get to this point. Putting a jog in his bedroom
wasn’t a good and design. If they wanted to sell the property, they need have a good
resale value, which required good design. That design was not practical. He submitted
letters from the neighbors on the North, the East and the West and a neighbor down the
street.
Perry Bolan, architect, indicated a new construction one block East of this property has
homes near $1 million, so it made sense to put value into this addition with a
straightforward, simple design that makes sure the master bedroom is very livable. If
they were forced to put in a jog, the room was not nearly as nice. Offsetting the suite
would put some or part of it up against their picture window, which would only be 1.7
feet from the wall. It adds value to the community. The narrowness of this lot was a
hardship. They will be making an investment, and if they followed the zoning
ordinance to the letter, they would not see as good of a return and get a lot less for the
property when they sell it. They were proposing landscaping along the North wall with
conifer trees that would break up the wall. He asked that the variance be granted.
Councilmember Carver asked the height of the roofline? Mr. Bolan replied nine feet to
the eave which would continue to the addition.
Councilmember Carver asked the maximum allowable height for a fence in the
backyard? Mr. Morrison replied six feet.
Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Sanger commented under normal circumstances she did not like to
overturn the work of the Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA) and she supported the
rationale behind the zoning ordinance. However, she didn’t think that rule made sense
for this particular property. There are hardships associated with the arrangement on the
property that support granting a variance. The property was too narrow compared to
what the zoning code required. It is on a corner and as a result the house is set further
back from 26th Street, off-center and relatively close to the property to the North. If this
variance is granted, another hardship would be avoided. She was invited to the home
and the picture window view would be partially blocked if the solution that the Planning
Commission came up with was implement. If the Board of Zoning Appeals solution
were required, the bedroom would be a zigzag shape, which would be unworkable. The
only person who would ever see the long wall were the people in the home directly to
the North. The suggestion of softening the appearance with landscaping or fencing
would take care of it. You cannot see the wall from any other direction.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Carver to direct
staff to draft a resolution approving a variance to section 36-163(f)(8) of the Zoning
Ordinance to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the
required 9 feet 10 inches at 2537 Inglewood Ave S, with a condition prohibiting a
second story on the home.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 5
Mayor Jacobs asked the City Attorney if they could draft a variance prohibiting
construction of a second story? Mr. Scott replied yes.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked if that was acceptable to the applicants? Mr. White
replied yes.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated he viewed the property and agreed with
Councilmember Sanger. This is a unique request, they have a small lot on a corner and
if they were to get any enjoyment of their property and follow the housing goals, this
was the one way to do it.
Councilmember Paprocki added this was a very deep lot and there would be plenty of
yard left. He commended them for a well-done addition.
Councilmember Carver agreed with previous comments. He noted that the Zoning
Appeals Board had a 2-2 vote and clearly they had some questions. It was ironic there
was no problem adding a garage addition, but a problem adding to the living space.
Mayor Jacobs agreed with the fact that there was a lot of thought at the Board of Zoning
Appeals. They do a lot of work and he typically didn’t like to overturn their work
either. As he went through the seven factors necessary to grant a variance, there were
clearly grounds to grant a variance on a number of those.
The motion passed 6-0.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
8a. Hoigaard Village - Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Final Plat
Resolution No 06-019 and 06-020
Mr. Fulton presented the staff report.
Noah Bly, Urban Works Architecture discussed the project site plan and presented a 3D
design model.
Frank Dunbar, Union Land II, reiterated that Hoigaard’s is in business and will stay in
business through construction. The closing is scheduled on February 28th. He hoped the
redevelopment contract would come together this week. If that happens, they would
buy all three parcels on February 28th and start immediately going through the review
process to begin demolition, which would take 60-90 days and open a marketing office
in March. When they meet their presale requirements, they hope to start Phase I in
June, 2006 and complete in June 2007. They would start the second building around the
first of September and complete it twelve months later. Hoigaard’s is working with
them to determine the time for them to be acquired. They are a member of the
partnership. They will start the Hoigaard’s project when they make a determination
about relocating. They would be back before the Council for Phase II plans.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 6
Councilmember Basill asked for an update on Hoigaard’s. He had been receiving phone
calls asking why the City was initiating this. They were not initiating this, Hoigaard’s
decided to sell. What are their plans? Mr. Dunbar replied they had indicated they
would probably go elsewhere and were looking at a number of sites, but had not shared
those. It was a very slight possibility they would stay on 36th.
Councilmember Basill wanted the community to know that Hoigaard’s was choosing to
sell and most likely wouldn’t be on 36th Street. They could not force a business to stay
here and residents should know that the city was not controlling this.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated either the deal made sense or it didn’t and they were not
approving or making any changes regarding tax increment financing in regards to whether
Hoigaard’s stayed or not. They would not be doing this deal as a business subsidy.
Mr. Dunbar stated they had a number of options, that did not mean they would leave the
community. They were working with them on the best time frame to acquire the site.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked clarification that Hoigaard’s was now a partner in the
real estate project? Mr. Dunbar replied that was true.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked if that would have an impact on their ability to issue
tax increment financing? Mr. Scott didn’t believe it would.
Councilmember Basill asked when the TIF discussion would come forward? Mr. Locke
replied staff was working on that and it would be before EDA and Council on February
21st.
Mr. Dunbar indicated that element was critical to him for closing on February 28th.
Mr. Harmening clarified the business points were brought to the Council a few weeks
ago with the amount of tax increment, the interest rate and the length of time. They
were being incorporated into the development contract that would be coming before
Council.
Councilmember Sanger asked what guaranteed all four buildings would be done and the
deadline? Ms. McMonigal replied the planned unit development is for the entire
development. They were looking at re-platting the first two buildings because those are
the buildings they were purchasing, demolishing and reconstructing at this time. There
are some financial guarantees that would be required as part of a planning/development
contract which included giving a financial guarantee for the pond.
Councilmember Sanger asked by what date would they reasonably expect that the whole
project would be completed? Mr. Dunbar responded under the terms of the TIF, the
outside date everything has to be done is December 2009. The draft development
agreement says everything has to be done by December 2008.
Councilmember Basill stated this is the first building on 36th Street and needed to look
good for the community because it was an entrance to the neighborhoods. Had they
done market studies on this type of building retro/industrial) and the attractiveness to
buyers? Mr. Dunbar replied a market research group analyzed the outside and the inside
and diversification of the project. They made changes to the exterior to provide more
detail.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 7
Councilmember Basill asked the unit prices? Mr. Dunbar replied the most cost effective
would be $192,900 and the corner units on the top would be $415,000, which had been
sold. The majority will be in the mid $300,000 range.
Councilmember Basill asked about the setback from 36th Street and expressed concern
about the walk-ability as people come over the bridge. Mr. Dunbar replied they had
tried to address that concern.
Councilmember Basill commented about the two buildings on the corner which were
not involved with this project. It would have been better if those buildings were part of
the project, although he realized they couldn’t be. He commended the developer for
coming in with the right density and seeing what fit for the community. This is below
what they could put on this property. They had found a nice balance.
David Stall, Urban Works, displayed other similar projects in the neighborhood
(Excelsior and Grand and Village in the Park) and compared the setbacks. They have
22’ from the curb edge, which did not include a parking aisle. Above the retail it steps
back for the residential.
Councilmember Basil felt the additional space would make it pedestrian friendly.
Ms. McMonigal stated because they were working on the redevelopment contract, some
conditions of approval may be modified. The redevelopment contract will be before
Council on February 21st, and they would clarify the conditions in the contract.
It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Paprocki, to adopt
Resolution No. 06-019 approving the Final Planned Unit Development, subject to
conditions as recommended by Staff.
The motion passed 6-0.
It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Paprocki, to adopt
Resolution No. 06-020 approving the Final Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Hoigaard
Village 1st Addition, subject to conditions as recommended by Staff.
The motion passed 6-0.
8b. Comprehensive Plan Amendments for three Excess Land Parcels
Resolution No. 06-021, 06-022 and 06-023
Mr. Fulton presented the staff report.
Councilmember Paprocki asked if the Edgebrook site was used occasionally by
residents as parking for the park and as a way to get to the park. By changing the
zoning, he wanted to be sure they still had an opportunity to reserve space for parking
and/or access to the park? Ms. Larsen replied yes.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 8
It was moved by Councilmember Paprocki, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to
adopt Resolution No. 06-021 amending the Comprehensive Plan for 7701 Edgebrook
Drive from P - Park to RL - Low Density Residential and approve publication of the
summary resolution; to adopt Resolution No. 06-022 amending the Comprehensive
Plan for a portion of 9019 Cedar Lake Road from P - Parks and Open Space to RL -
Low Density Residential as shown on the attached map and approve publication of the
summary resolution; and, to adopt Resolution No. 06-023 amending the Comprehensive
Plan for 2715 Monterey Avenue South from P - Park to RL - Low Density Residential
and approve publication of the summary resolution.
The motion passed 6-0.
8c. Agreement Between the City of St. Louis Park and Torah Academy
Relating to Joint Use of Facilities.
Ms. Walsh presented the details of the agreement and noted Torah Academy requested it
be a two-year agreement.
Reverend Ginsburg, Dean at Torah Academy, stated a paper agreement was only as
good as the people who signed it. He understood the need for the formality, but
appreciated and valued the relationship that they have had and looked forward to
continuing it.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, to adopt approve the agreement between the
City of St. Louis Park and Torah Academy for joint use of facilities, with amendments as
follows: Section 7, clarify this is a two-year agreement commencing on January 1, 2006
and ending December 31, 2007; Section 3, add “non exclusive” in the second sentence
after “The Academy will have the”; at the end of the same paragraph insert “and the
city will determine when repairs or replacement of the equipment is necessary” after
“…safety regulations.”.
Councilmember Paprocki asked about the non-exclusive use? Councilmember Sanger
replied during the school day Torah Academy and its children would have the use of the
playground, but that should not preclude others in the neighborhood who may also want
to use the playground equipment at the same time.
Councilmember Paprocki asked if that was amenable to the Academy? They replied
yes.
The motion was seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein.
Councilmember Sanger asked if this would impact the City’s agreement to maintain or
replace the park building? Ms. Walsh replied what would be in the City’s best interest
would be to wait until Torah Academy got further along in their Visioning process. The
City’s intent is to change that building, either reconstruct it in its present form as a picnic
shelter usable to the neighborhood. They would also like to do field improvements at that
time. Torah Academy is undertaking a Visioning process and they want to work with that.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 9
Christie Ulman, Board of Directors at Torah Academy, suggested they clarify in
Sections 2 and 3, the last sentence where it says, “The parties…” to be “Both parties”.
Councilmember Sanger agreed with the change to Sections 2 and 3, the last sentence to
change, “The parties…” to “Both parties”.
The motion passed 6-0.
8d. First Reading: Proposed Ordinance Amending Chapter 12, Section II,
Private Residential Pools
Mr. Hoffman presented the staff report.
Mayor Jacobs asked if this would apply to existing pools? Mr. Hoffman replied, only
for new pools installations.
Mayor Jacobs asked if there was a concern about building up too much heat? Mr. Hoffman
replied the pump house would have to be large enough to allow heat to escape and be
ventilated.
Councilmember Basill believed manufacturers of pumps have specifications for
enclosures. They would need to get a permit and it would be inspected to make sure
they were following the specifications. Mr. Hoffman replied that was correct. This code
requirement would not set the specifics and not tell people how to build it. They would
say to put it inside of a detached accessory structure (i.e. garage) or in a pump
enclosure.
Councilmember Sanger spoke in favor of the motion. This has been an issue for some
people, particularly as some of the pump motors age, they don’t work as quietly as they
were designed and it becomes an issue for neighbors.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger to approve First Reading of the amendment to
the Environmental Code - Private Residential Pools section of the Ordinance Code and
to set 2nd reading for February 21, 2006.
Councilmember Carver asked if this would apply if someone were replacing a pump?
Mr. Hoffman replied no, only with a new pool installation.
Councilmember Carver seconded the motion.
Councilmember Paprocki clarified someone getting a new pump would not need an
enclosure, but if they were getting a new pool, they would? Mr. Hoffman replied yes.
The trigger is the permit, which is required for the installation of a swimming pool or
replacing a pool and would need to meet performance criteria.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 10
Councilmember Paprocki asked that could encourage someone not to replace their pool
and just replace their pump to avoid enclosing it. Sheds need to have a pad to avoid
wildlife inhabiting underneath. Does this require a pad? Mr. Hoffman replied it would
be the owners choice, it was not required.
Councilmember Paprocki asked what a noise attenuating structure was? Mr. Hoffman
replied something designed to reduce the sound being transmitted from the equipment to the
outside. It could be any type of wood structure and would need to meet the code
requirements.
Councilmember Paprocki was unsure why they were doing this.
Mayor Jacobs agreed, he understood a concern was raised by a resident, but he did not
see a big enough problem to do something. He was unsure he could support this.
Councilmember Sanger believed this was a growing problem because a growing number
of people were installing pools. Sometimes they were on smaller lots and closer to
neighbors. While a motor may be designed to be quiet, that doesn’t mean it actually
was quiet. Because they run non-stop, it can be an irritant to neighbors.
Mayor Jacobs was unsure pumps were louder than air conditioners. He hadn’t heard
complaints on this issue and didn’t believe it was a big enough issue to pass an
ordinance.
Councilmember Basill agreed with the issue about rodents and thought it would be a
burden to put in a cement pad. He was concerned about the heat, how they would be
built and if it would be a fire hazard. He understood a resident had a concern, but he
didn’t know if there was a problem.
Councilmember Finkelstein believed this was discussed in 2005 and they thought the
“cure might be worse than the disease” with people putting up structures, although he
was sympathetic to the resident with concerns.
Mayor Jacobs noted this ordinance wouldn’t solve that problem.
The motion failed 1-5 with Councilmember’s Basill, Carver, Finkelstein, Paprocki and
Mayor Jacobs opposed.
9. Communications
Mayor Jacobs reported on the Visioning process and indicated a Visioning Summit would be
held Sunday, February 12th at the High School Field House from 1-4 PM.
The Remodeling Fair will be February 26th at the Eisenhower Community Center in Hopkins
from 10:30-3:30.
The Youth Summit will be held on March 30th at the St. Louis Park Junior High. More
information will follow.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 3a - City Council Minutes Feb. 6, 2006
Page 11
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:07 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
City Clerk Mayor
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4a - Boulevard Tree Removal Contract
Page 1
4a. Motion to designate B.J. Haines Tree Service as the lowest responsible bidder
and authorize execution of a contract for the 2006 Boulevard Tree and Stump
Removal Program in an amount not to exceed $118,286.00.
Background: In 2004 the City implemented a cost sharing program for all boulevard tree
removals, with the impacted property owner and the City equaling sharing the cost of
removal of the condemned tree and its stump.
Once a tree is identified and marked for removal, staff sends a proposal to the impacted
property owner for 50% of the cost of tree and stump removal (stump removal will include
grinding stump, removal of grinding debris, backfilling stump hole with quality black soil
and seeding area with specified grass seed mix). If the resident chooses to use B.J. Haines
Tree Service, which 99% of residents impacted in 2005 chose to use, the City will invoice
the property owner for 50% of the removal costs. If requested by the property owner, the
City will also agree to special assess their share of the removal cost against their property
as a means to ease the burden of paying this expense.
Bid Analysis: Bid packages for the 2006 Boulevard Tree and Stump Removal contract
were mailed out in early January to 23 tree firms. Bids were opened on February 6, 2006 at
City Hall. Three bids were subsequently received in the amounts as follows:
B.J. Haines Tree Service $ 118,286.00
Emery’s Tree Service, Inc. $ 173,315.00
S & S Tree & Horticulture, Inc. $ 213,173.00
The above amount from B.J. Haines Tree Service represents an average cost of $383 for a
22” diameter tree. In 2005, the City paid $402 for the same size tree. Staff is pleased the
above bid amount represents a decrease in cost for the City from last year.
Recommendation: Staff recommends B.J. Haines Tree Service as the 2006 Boulevard
Tree and Stump Removal Contractor. B.J. Haines successfully performed the City of St.
Louis Park 2005 Boulevard Tree Removal Contract and is currently recommended for the
2006 Private Tree Removal contract. Staff is confident this company can perform both
2006 tree removal contracts simultaneously and with success.
Prepared by: Jim Vaughan, Environmental Coordinator
Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4b - Private Diseased Tree Removal
Page 1
x. Motion to designate North Star Tree Care, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder
and authorize execution of a contract for the 2005 private diseased tree removal
program in an amount not to exceed $447,760.00.
4b. Motion to designate B.J. Haines Tree Service as the lowest responsible bidder and
authorize execution of a contract for the 2006 private diseased tree removal
program in an amount not to exceed $166,635.50.
City Council Consent Item
Background: The City has been participating in the removal of diseased trees on private
property for more than 25 years. During the initial phases, funding was provided through the
Community Development Block Grant Program and subsidies were established at a 50% level.
When CDBG guidelines were altered (approximately 15 years ago) we were no longer able to
remove diseased trees using these funds. As a result, the City’s subsidy program was stepped
back over the course of five years until it reached the current level (no cash subsidy) at the end of
1995.
The City’s role in this process is to administer the program whichhandle all paperwork. This
includes management of the contract, preparing official notices, billing the homeowners,
establishing a timely schedule for the removals and providing a follow-up inspection. As in
previous years, an updated brochure explaining the City’s removal program has been prepared
and will be distributed to all affected property owners at the time their diseased trees are
identified by staff.
The 2006 Dutch elm disease bids reflect projected costs for the removal of 325 average-size
private trees. Property owners will reimburse the City for the entire cost of for private tree
removals. In 2005, there were 637 private trees removed in St. Louis Park by a contractor due to
Dutch elm disease. Of those 637 trees, 433 of those were removed by the City contractor.
Please note that if the property owner uses the City’s contractor for the removal, the City will
agree to assess the entire cost of the removal against the property as a means to ease the burden
of paying this expense
The approved bid prices will also be used to calculate costs in cases where property owners
refuse to comply with the official removal notice. In all other cases, homeowners will be allowed
to solicit their own private bids and may choose to have the work performed by a different
licensed contractor at their expense.
Bid Analysis: Bid packages for the 2006 private diseased tree removal contract were mailed out
in early January to 17 tree firms. Bids were opened on February 1, 2006 at City Hall. Three bids
were subsequently received in the amounts as follows:
B.J. Haines Tree Service $ 166,635.50
Emery’s Tree Service, Inc. $ 203,100.00
S & S Tree & Horticultural, Inc. $ 539,650.00
The above bid amount from B.J. Haines Tree Service represents an average cost of $550 for a
24” diameter tree. In 2005, the City paid $800 for the same size tree. Staff is pleased this bid
amount represents a substantial decrease in cost for the City from last year.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4b - Private Diseased Tree Removal
Page 2
Recommendation: City staff is recommending B.J. Haines Tree Service as they have
successfully performed one previous private diseased tree removal contract for the City of St.
Paul and have successfully completed the 2005 St. Louis Park Boulevard Tree Removal Contact.
Prepared by: James Vaughan, Environmental Coordinator
Cindy S. Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4c - Transfer Of Funds
Page 1
4c. Motion to approve transfer of $280,000 from the Permanent Improvement
Revolving (PIR) Fund to the Wireless Enterprise Fund
Background:
The City of St. Louis Park is in the process of implementing a Pilot program for wireless
services. This Pilot program requires total cash outlay of an amount not to exceed
$280,000. The City anticipates that wireless services will be available in March of this
year and the pilot program will run through June. If all goes well, staff anticipates that the
City Council will be asked to decide in June if wireless services should be made available
City-wide.
Request:
Staff is recommending transferring $280,000 from the Permanent Improvement Revolving
(PIR) Fund to the Wireless Enterprise Fund as start up costs. If wireless services are
implemented on a city-wide basis, then the PIR fund would be reimbursed and a loan
would be created between the EDA Development Fund and the Wireless Enterprise Fund.
If the Council decides that wireless services will not go city-wide, then the transfer of
funds will be considered a principal reduction of the PIR Fund.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared By: Jean McGann, Director of Finance
Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4c - Transfer Of Funds
Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 06-046
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A TRANSFER FROM THE
PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT REVOLVING FUND TO THE WIRELESS
ENTERPRISE FUND
WHEREAS; The City of St. Louis Park approved the implementation of a Pilot
program providing for wireless services in St. Louis Park
WHEREAS; The total cost of the Wireless Pilot program is budgeted at $280,000
WHEREAS; It has been determined that $280,000 should be transferred out of the
Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to provide funding the Wireless Pilot Program
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of St. Louis Park City
Council
That approval is given to transfer funds from the Permanent Improvement
Revolving Fund in the amount of $280,000.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4d - Resolution Gambling Renewal Comm Charities
Page 1
4d. Motion to approve Resolutions authorizing Gambling Premises Permit for
Community Charities of Minnesota operating at : Park Tavern Lanes & Lounge,
3401 Louisiana Ave. and TexaTonka Lanes, 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard
Background:
Community Charities of Minnesota has submitted application to the City of St. Louis Park to
renew their gambling premises license permit for their two locations in which licenses expire
March 31, 2006.
Community Charities of Minnesota is a non-profit charitable fundraising licensed lawful
gambling organization currently operating at numerous bars, bowling lanes and similar
establishments throughout the state. In addition to the pull tab booth at Park Tavern and Texa
Tonka Lanes in St. Louis Park, they also operate lawful gambling sales at 39 other locations in
the region. Officers are as follows:
Gene Glorvigan CEO
Mark Healy Treasurer
Douglas DeMarce Gambling Manager
Park Tavern Lanes & Lounge, 3401 Louisiana Avenue
Licensed gambling has been in operation at this location for many years. Pull-tab sales are
currently in progress at this location by Community Charities under a previously issued permit.
which will expire March 31, 2006.
Texa Tonka Lanes, 8200 Minnetonka Blvd.
Licensed gambling has been in operation at this location for many years. Pull-tab sales are
already in progress at this location under a permit recently issued in December 2005 to expire
March 31, 2006.
All current requirements for issuance of the license have been met. The Police Department has
conducted a background investigation on the organization, its officers, and related personnel.
This action does not require a public hearing as the building location meets all proximity
requirements in the ordinance.
Recommendation: License materials are in order and the staff recommends approval. Should
the City Council approve the application, the resolutions of approval will be forwarded to the
State Gambling Control Board who is responsible for issuing the licenses.
Attachments: Resolution Park Tavern
Resolution Texa Tonka Lanes
Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4d - Resolution Gambling Renewal Comm Charities
Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 06-040
A RESOLUTION APPROVING ISSUANCE OF A PREMISES PERMIT
FOR LAWFUL GAMBLING
COMMUNITY CHARITIES OF MINNESOTA OPERATING AT
TEXA TONKA LANES,
8200 MINNETONKA BOULEVARD, ST. LOUIS PARK
April 1, 2006 – March 31, 2008
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 349 and St. Louis Park Ordinance Code
Section 15, provide for lawful gambling licensing by the State Gambling Control Board; and
WHEREAS, a licensed organization may not conduct lawful gambling at any site unless
it has first obtained from the Board a premise permit for the site; and
WHEREAS, the Board may not issue or renew a premises permit unless the organization
submits a resolution from the City Council approving the premises permit; therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED by the City of St. Louis Park City Council that the applicant listed
above meets the criteria necessary to receive a premises permit, and the application is hereby
approved.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4d - Resolution Gambling Renewal Comm Charities
Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 06-039
A RESOLUTION APPROVING ISSUANCE OF A PREMISES PERMIT
FOR LAWFUL GAMBLING
COMMUNITY CHARITIES OF MINNESOTA OPERATING AT
PARK TAVERN LANES & LOUNGE,
3401 LOUISIANA AVE S, ST. LOUIS PARK
April 1, 2006 – March 31, 2008
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 349 and St. Louis Park Ordinance Code
Section 15, provide for lawful gambling licensing by the State Gambling Control Board; and
WHEREAS, a licensed organization may not conduct lawful gambling at any site unless
it has first obtained from the Board a premise permit for the site; and
WHEREAS, the Board may not issue or renew a premises permit unless the organization
submits a resolution from the City Council approving the premises permit; therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED by the City of St. Louis Park City Council that the applicant listed
above meets the criteria necessary to receive a premises permit, and the application is hereby
approved.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4e - Resolution Variance 2537 Inglewood
Page 1
4e. Motion to approve Resolution for a variance to allow an addition for the property
located at 2537 Inglewood Ave. S. John White applicant Case No. 05-68-VAR
Summary of Request:
As directed by Council on February 6, 2004, attached is a resolution and findings of fact for
approval of John White’s application for a 2 foot 8 inch variance to allow the construction of an
addition to the back of the home that would be 7 feet, 2 inches from the side property line instead
of the required 9 feet 10 inches required by code. As requested by the Council, the resolution
contains a provision which conditions the variance on the prohibition of a second story for that
portion of the home for which a variance is granted
Background:
BOZA heard the application on January 5, 2006. A motion was made to approve the application,
but it failed on a 2-2 vote. Since a motion could not be made to approve the variance, the
application stood as denied.
Mr. White appealed the action to the City Council. The Council heard the appeal on February 6,
2006, and voted to direct staff to prepare a Resolution approving the requested variance to be
brought to the Council for action at the February 21, 2006 meeting.
Recommendation:
Motion to adopt resolution granting a variance to Section 36-163(f)(8) of the Zoning Ordinance
to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10
inches at 2537 Inglewood Ave. S.
Attachments: Proposed Resolution of Approval
Proposed Site Plan
Prepared By: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4e - Resolution Variance 2537 Inglewood
Page 2
VARIANCE
RESOLUTION NO. 06-047
RESOLUTION OF FINDING REGARDING THE APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE
UNDER SECTION 36-163(F)(8) TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE WITH A
7 FOOT 2 INCH SIDE YARD INSTEAD OF THE
REQUIRED 9 FEET 10 INCHES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE
R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, AT
2537 INGLEWOOD AVENUE SOUTH
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
FINDINGS
1. On November 22, 2005, John White filed an application seeking a variance from Section
36-163(f)(8) to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the
required 9 feet 10 inches for property located in the R-1 Single Family Residential
District for the following legal description, to wit:
Lot 6 and South 5 feet of Lot 7, Block 7, Basswood, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
2. On January 5, 2006, the Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing, received
testimony from the public, and discussed the application for Variance Case No. 05-68-
VAR.
3. The Board failed to pass a motion granting or denying the variance due to a 2-2 vote.
The variance therefore stands as denied.
4. Mr. John White requested an appeal of Board of Zoning Appeals action.
5. On February 6, 2006 the City Council considered the appeal and the effect of the
proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the
effect on values of property in the surrounding area, and the effect of the proposed
variance upon the Comprehensive Plan.
6. Based on the testimony, evidence presented, and files and records, the City Council
makes the following findings:
a. The requested variance meets the requirements of Section 36-33(d)(5) of the
Zoning Ordinance necessary to be met for a variance to be granted. The lot is
both narrow and a corner lot, the combination of which makes it difficult to use
the property in a reasonable manner.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4e - Resolution Variance 2537 Inglewood
Page 3
b. The requested addition is in keeping with the housing goals of the City of St.
Louis Park, and is a reasonable use of the land. Additions similar in size and
function are commonly built throughout St. Louis Park.
c. The granting of the variance will not have an adverse impact on neighboring
properties, and will not be visible from the public right-of-ways.
7. The contents of the Board of Zoning Appeals Case File 05-68-VAR are hereby entered
into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
8. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this variance shall be deemed to be abandoned, revoked, or
canceled if the holder shall fail to complete the work on or before one year after the
variance is granted.
9. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this variance shall be revoked and cancelled if the building
or structure for which the variance is granted is removed.
CONCLUSION
The applicant’s request for a variance from 36-163(f)(8) to allow an addition to the house with a
7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches for the above legally described
property is hereby approved based on the findings set forth above and with the following
conditions:
1. The addition be constructed in accordance with the approved exhibits; and
2. The variance is granted to allow a one-story addition to the home. A second story shall
not be constructed over that portion of the home for which the variance was granted.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4f - REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Page 1
4f. Motion to authorize the execution of the REBA (Retirement Enhancement and
Benefit Alternatives Program) Joint Powers Agreement.
Background
The Retirement Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives (REBA) is a multiple employer trust
arrangement that the City of St. Louis Park joined on January 1, 2005. This trust provides a
benefit of aggregate pricing and services for all employers that participate in the VEBA program
(Voluntary Employee Benefit Association). The City participates in the VEBA program through
our high deductible health insurance plan and our post-employment Health Care Savings Plan.
Current members of the REBA trust include the cities of St. Louis Park, Burnsville, Ramsey and
Shoreview and the following school districts: Fridley, Hopkins, Hutchinson, Minnetonka, Inver
Grove Heights, Owatonna, Pine Island, Redwood Area, Spring Lake Park, and St. Francis.
It is recommended that the attached Joint Powers Agreement be approved to formally recognize
this cooperative activity. Documents have been reviewed by the City Attorney.
The Joint Powers Agreement creates a joint powers board known as an “Advisory Council”
which is empowered to oversee and administer the REBA. Each participating jurisdiction has
one member on the Advisory Council. For St. Louis Park, our representative is Nancy Gohman,
Deputy City Manager/HR Director. The Joint Powers Agreement will formalize the trust
relationship which has been in place since January 1, 2005.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize staff to execute the REBA (Retirement
Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives Program) Joint Powers Agreement as attached.
Attachment: REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Prepared by: Ali Fosse, HR Coordinator
Reviewed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4f - REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Page 2
JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT
FOR
RETIREMENT ENHANCEMENT AND BENEFIT ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM
This Joint Powers Agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and among the Adopting
Employers that are now or may hereafter become parties to this Agreement.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, governmental units may provide health benefits to employees, former
employees and spouses and dependents thereof; and
WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 471.59, subds. 1 and 10 authorize two or more governmental
units to exercise jointly or cooperatively powers which they possess in common; and
WHEREAS, certain governmental units (“Adopting Employers”) wish to authorize the
Retirement Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives Program (“REBA”) to act as a joint powers
entity for the purpose of exercising certain powers as set forth in this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Adopting Employers acknowledge REBA as a representative of the
parties to this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, REBA sponsors the Retirement Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives
Program Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Association Plan (the “Plan”); and
WHEREAS, REBA sponsors the Retirement Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives
Program Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Association Trust and the Retirement Enhancement
Benefit and Alternatives Program Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Association Trust II
(collectively referred to as the “Trusts”); and
WHEREAS, the Trusts are voluntary employee beneficiary associations under Section
501(c)(9) of the Internal Revenue Code;
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements contained
herein and subject to the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 471.59 and all other applicable statutes,
rules and regulations, the parties agree as follows:
1. PURPOSE, INTENT AND OBJECTIVE
1.1 PURPOSE.
Under the provisions of Minnesota law, governmental units may enter into contracts for
the purposes of providing medical benefits to current employees, former employees, and their
respective families including, but not limited to, contracts for services deemed necessary or
beneficial for their operation. Under the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 471.59, two or more
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4f - REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Page 3
governmental units (including, but not limited to, school districts, counties, towns, other
governmental agencies, and service cooperatives) may agree to exercise jointly or cooperatively
powers which they possess in common. The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize the
exercise of common powers of the Adopting Employers in connection with certain matters
pertaining to the administration and funding of the Plan and Trusts, all as described herein.
1.2 Name.
The name of this joint powers entity shall be the Retirement Enhancement and Benefit
Alternatives Program (“REBA”).
1.3 Compliance with Applicable Laws.
It is the Adopting Employers’ intent to comply with applicable federal and state statutory
requirements.
1.4 Effective Date.
This Agreement shall be effective with respect to a particular Adopting Employer as of
the date of such Adopting Employer’s initial participation as identified below.
2. DEFINITIONS
The following Definitions shall apply to this Agreement:
a) Administrative Services Agreement (“ASA”) means an agreement by and between
the Advisory Council and a Provider, or an Adopting Employer and a Provider, that
establishes terms for the administration of the Plan and/or Trusts.
b) Adopting Employer means a governmental unit that has adopted the Plan, thereby
becoming a member of REBA.
c) Advisory Council means the advisory council of the REBA, acting as the joint board
authorized to exercise certain powers of the Adopting Employers, as permitted by
Minn. Stat. § 471.59, subd. 2, and as set forth in this Agreement.
d) Agreement means this Joint Powers Agreement as the same may be amended from
time to time. This document, and all other documents in the same form executed (or
deemed executed as provided in Section 9 of this Agreement) by Adopting
Employers, all as amended from time to time, shall together constitute a single
Agreement.
e) Bylaws means the bylaws of the Advisory Council.
f) Code means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended from time to time.
g) Plan means Retirement Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives Program Voluntary
Employees’ Beneficiary Association Plan.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4f - REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Page 4
h) Provider means a service provider, including, but not limited to, third party
administrators, consultants, accountants, brokers, attorney and trustees, providing
services to health plans and trusts such as the Plan and Trusts.
i) REBA means the Retirement Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives Program, the
joint powers entity created by the Adopting Employers as reflected in this Agreement.
j) Trusts mean the Retirement Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives Program
Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Association Trust and the Retirement
Enhancement and Benefit Alternatives Program Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary
Association Trust II. Each is intended to be a voluntary employees’ beneficiary
association as described § 501(c)(9) of the Code.
3. JOINT POWERS GOVERNING BOARD
3.1 Membership.
Membership in REBA shall be open to any governmental unit or other political
subdivision as set forth in Minn. Stat. § 471.59, subd. 1, and Minn. Stat. § 471.981 including, but
not limited to, joint powers agencies of the State of Minnesota that are deemed by the Advisory
Council to qualify for membership. The Advisory Council may impose such conditions on
membership as it deems appropriate to protect the interest of REBA and to provide for the
benefit of the Adopting Employer; and such conditions as are required by the Agreement, the
Bylaws, or by applicable statutes, rules, or regulations. The Advisory Council, at its discretion
and in accordance with the Bylaws, may create classes, levels or types of membership within
REBA with differing member rights, privileges or obligations. Upon adoption of the Plan, an
Adopting Employer shall also execute this Agreement and file it with the Advisory Council.
3.2 Joint Powers Board.
There is hereby created a joint powers board, herein referred to as the “Advisory
Council,” which shall be empowered to oversee and administer REBA. The Advisory Council
shall be empowered to manage all the affairs of REBA and do to all things necessary or
convenient for the furtherance of the purposes of REBA, including but not limited to: expending
and receiving funds; entering into contracts, leases, and other agreements; renting, leasing,
purchasing and otherwise procuring or receiving property real or personal; employing personnel
either as employees or by contract; and employing consultants such as attorneys, auditors,
accountants, risk managers, actuaries and others.
3.3 Advisory Council Representation.
Each member of REBA shall have representation on the Advisory Council equal to every
other member. Subject to the foregoing, representation shall be determined pursuant to the
Bylaws. The Advisory Council shall act by majority vote of the representatives appointed to it.
As appropriate, the Advisory Council may designate one or more representatives to act on its
behalf.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4f - REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Page 5
3.4 Committee(s).
The Advisory Council may, but is not required to, establish one or more committees. The
purpose of any such committee may include, without limitation, the management of the affairs of
REBA and the receipt and processing of information relating to Plan and Trusts.
3.5 Upon Dissolution of REBA.
In the event that REBA is dissolved, the Advisory Council shall continue to exist for a
reasonable period to wind up REBA’s affairs. Any administrative services provided to the Plan
or Trusts prior to the dissolution of REBA shall be provided thereafter as determined by the
Advisory Council in its discretion.
4. RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL
4.1 Authorized Powers.
Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.59, subd. 2, in addition to any other powers specifically
delegated to the Advisory Council by this Agreement, the Advisory Council is hereby authorized
to:
a) establish, procure, and administer the Plan and the Trusts;
b) define and clarify requests for proposals, rights and responsibilities, length of
contract, premium or contribution rates and other costs, termination guidelines,
the relative liability of the parties, and the method(s) by which parties to this
Agreement shall exercise their common powers; and
c) receive, collect, hold, invest, expend and disburse contributions to the Trusts in
connection with the exercise of its powers under this Agreement; and
d) adopt Bylaws, which shall provide for the operation and administration of the
Advisory Council, and adopt other operating policies and procedures to direct and
document the specific activities of REBA.
4.2 Reserves.
The Advisory Council shall from time to time determine the minimum amount of funds
needed for purposes of risk management, administration, and other needs of the Plan and Trusts.
Any such funds shall be held and used in accordance with, and subject to the limitations set forth
in, Section 6.
4.3 Administrative Services Agreements.
The Advisory Council may negotiate one or more Administrative Services Agreements
for the benefit of REBA with respect to the Plan and the Trusts. Such Administrative Services
Agreements may establish, among other things:
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4f - REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Page 6
a) the applicable responsibilities of the Provider;
b) the applicable responsibilities of the Advisory Council; and
c) the amount of service fees payable to the Provider.
4.4 Liability Limited.
The Advisory Council, its authorized representatives, employees and designees shall have
no duty or liability due to negligence of Adopting Employers or Providers. When it is not
exercising the joint powers authorized by this Agreement (and therefore not acting as the
Advisory Council), the Advisory Council shall have no duty or obligation whatsoever to act for
the benefit of the Adopting Employers.
5. RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF ADOPTING EMPLOYERS
5.1 Adopting Employers to Furnish Data.
Each Adopting Employer agrees to furnish all reasonably necessary data to the Advisory
Council, or Provider or other third party as directed by the Advisory Council.
5.2 Remittance of Contributions and Fees.
The Adopting Employers shall remit contributions and/or administrative fees in the time
and manner as set forth in the Plan, the Trusts, and/or the Administrative Services Agreements.
5.3 COBRA Administration.
To the extent an Adopting Employer is, through the Public Health Services Act, subject
to the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, as amended (“COBRA”), such
Adopting Employer shall be responsible for complying with the requirements of COBRA with
respect to their employees participating in the Plan. Such responsibility shall include all aspects
of administering the continuation coverage required by COBRA including, but not limited to,
providing notices required by COBRA. The Advisory Council, as the “plan administrator” of the
Plan, has delegated its responsibilities under COBRA to the Adopting Employers.
5.4 Adopting Employer Withdrawal.
An Adopting Employer’s participation in this Agreement may be terminated as follows:
5.4.1 Voluntary Withdrawal. At any time during a year, an Adopting Employer may
terminate its participation in this Agreement upon ninety (90) days written notice to the
Advisory Council and to all Providers.
5.4.2 Deemed Withdrawal. An Adopting Employer shall be deemed to have
terminated its participation in this Agreement upon withdrawal from the Plan and the
Trusts.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4f - REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Page 7
5.4.3 Involuntary Withdrawal. The Advisory Council may terminate an Adopting
Employer’s participation in this Agreement for cause upon ninety (90) days notice to said
Adopting Employer.
5.5 Effect of Adopting Employer Withdrawal.
Upon an Adopting Employer’s withdrawal from this Agreement, the following rules shall
apply:
5.5.1 Withdrawal from the Plan and Trust. Upon withdrawal from this Agreement,
an Adopting Employer shall be deemed to have withdrawn from the Plan and Trusts.
5.5.2 Continuance of REBA. The withdrawal of an Adopting Employer shall not
affect the continuance of REBA by the remaining Adopting Employers.
5.5.3 Liability of Withdrawing Adopting Employer. An Adopting Employer that
withdraws shall remain jointly and severally liable for all debts, obligations and liabilities
incurred on its behalf during the term of its membership. The liability of an Adopting
Employer upon withdrawal shall be determined in accordance with the Bylaws, Plan,
Trusts and/or Administrative Services Agreements.
6. CONTRIBUTIONS AND ASSESSMENTS
6.1 Contributions.
Adopting Employers shall make contributions as required under the Plan. All
contributions shall be held in the Trusts.
6.2 Assessments.
The Advisory Council may, at its discretion, determine that an assessment is necessary to
insure the financial integrity of the Plan and/or the Trusts, to operate and maintain the Plan
and/or the Trusts, or to carry out other purposes of REBA pursuant to this Agreement. Such
assessments shall be in a form, manner and amount as determined by the Advisory Council,
provided that an assessment against an Adopting Employer shall not exceed $7,500 for any
calendar year. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Adopting Employer shall be required to make,
or otherwise be responsible for, a contribution to the Plan and the Trust on behalf of another
Adopting Employer if such Adopting Employer fails to make a contribution required by the Plan.
The Advisory Council may, in its discretion, establish and maintain separate accounts for
specified portions of the assessment, and may designate specific purposes.
7. LENGTH OF AGREEMENT AND TERMINATION
This Agreement shall remain in effect until the first of the following to occur:
a) The Agreement terminates by the mutual consent of the parties to the Agreement;
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4f - REBA Joint Powers Agreement
Page 8
b) The Agreement is suspended or superseded by a subsequent agreement between
the parties to the Agreement, or
c) The Agreement terminates by operation of law.
8. LIABILITY OF PARTIES
An Adopting Employer to this Agreement holds the Advisory Council and its members
harmless from any and all causes of action arising at law or inequity unless such action shall
arise from gross negligence. The parties agree to waive any rights to litigation from any dispute
arising out of this Agreement unless such action is the result of intentional wrongdoing.
9. AGREEMENT BY PARTICIPATION
Any gov ernmental unit that adopts the Plan, and thereby becomes an Adopting Employer,
shall be deemed to have approved this Agreement and, in the case of an eligible governmental
unit, to have executed this Agreement by its duly authorized officers, and shall be bound by the
terms and conditions of this Agreement to the same extent as if such formal approval had been
obtained and such execution had occurred.
10. DISPOSITION UP DISSOLUTION
In the event that REBA is dissolved, any property or other assets acquired by the
Advisory Council shall be distributed as determined by the Advisory Council and as permitted
under applicable law. Sufficient reserves shall be retained and maintained consistent with the
Plan’s obligations and known or foreseeable risks under this Agreement and applicable laws or
regulations.
Pursuant to all applicable state and federal laws, this Agreement has been approved by the
governing boards of the parties and is signed by the duly authorized officers of the parties.
ADOPTING EMPLOYER
Name of Governmental Unit _____________________________________________________
By_________________________________ By _____________________________________
Title _______________________________ Title ____________________________________
Date _______________________________ Date ____________________________________
Date of Initial Participation ______________________________________________________
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4g - Resolution Final Payment 121-05 Ron Kassa
Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. 06-048
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON
RANDOM CURB AND GUTTER
CITY PROJECT NO. 2005-0004
CONTRACT NO. 121-05
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 September 30, 2005, Ron Kassa
Construction, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the random curb and gutter
replacement, as per Contract No. 121-05.
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 $26,585.00
Change Order 00
Extra Work 33,287.40
Final Contract Price $59,872.40
Previous Payments ($43,966.00)
Balance Due $15,906.40
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4h - Final Payment 77-05 Valley Paving
Page 1
RESOLUTION NO. 06-049
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON
2005 MSA STREET REHABILITATION PROJECT
CITY PROJECT NO. 2004-1100
CONTRACT NO. 77-05
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 June 20, 2005, Valley Paving, Inc. has
satisfactorily completed the 2005 MSA street rehabilitation project, as per Contract No. 77-05.
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 $843,724.12
Change Order 12,865.43
Under Run 56,013.14
Final Contract Price $800,576.41
Previous Payments ($737,407.81)
Balance Due $63,168.60
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4i - Resolution Variance Quentin Ave
Page 1
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: As part of the City’s ongoing Capital Improvement
Program (C.I.P.), specific streets within the City are programmed for rehabilitation each year. In
accordance with the program, Quentin Avenue from Excelsior Boulevard to Wooddale Avenue
has been programmed for rehabilitation in 2006. Because Quentin Avenue is designated as a
Municipal State Aid street under the City’s adopted plan, it has been programmed to utilize
Municipal State Aid funds to fund the rehabilitation work. The planned rehabilitation work is
essentially removal and replacement of the existing bituminous surface (mill and overlay) with
some minor amounts of spot curb repairs.
In order for funds to be eligible for construction on a State Aid street, the street must be
reconstructed to Municipal State Aid design standards. These standards are very specific with
regards to certain requirements such as street grades, width, pavement thicknesses, etc.
Quentin Avenue currently does not meet State Aid standards for the minimum width
requirements. Presently, Quentin Avenue is 27-28 feet wide with parking allowed on only one
side of the street (west side). According to State Aid standards, a street with parking allowed on
one side must have a minimum width of 32 feet. Because the street does not meet the minimum
width standards, State Aid funds are not readily available to fund the rehabilitation.
Staff have therefore reviewed and considered the following options:
1. Rehabilitating Quentin Avenue with other funds. Currently, no monies from the
pavement management or other funds are available for this work. The project could
possibly be deferred to the future, pending funding availability.
2. Reconstructing Quentin Avenue to 32 feet in width. This would be difficult due to tight
boulevard constraints and would involve the removal and/or relocation of trees, retaining
walls, sidewalks, and other features. Impacts to several of the adjacent properties would
be significant.
3. Remove all parking from Quentin Avenue. This does not appear to be a viable and
acceptable solution to the neighboring properties, based upon observed parking that
occurs on the street.
4. Request a variance from State Aid Standards. Staff has investigated the possibility of
applying for a variance from State Aid standards in order to utilize State Aid funds. An
application and hearing in front of a variance committee is required as part of this
process. Although there is no certainty in being successful, staff feels that this alternative
is worth pursuing. If a variance is approved, State Aid funds could be used for the
project.
4i Motion to adopt Resolution requesting the Minnesota Department of
Transportation to grant a variance from Municipal State Aid Standards - Quentin
Avenue from Excelsior Boulevard to Wooddale Avenue. Project 2005-1100
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4i - Resolution Variance Quentin Ave
Page 2
Of the four options identified above, staff feels pursuit of a State Aid variance is the most
reasonable alternative available to the City at this time.
Variance Process
The next scheduled variance hearing is scheduled for March 16, 2006. In order to be scheduled
for the hearing, an application must be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Transportation
by March 1, 2006. This application must include a resolution from the governing authority (as
attached) requesting the variance. At this hearing, the requestor presents the application and
appropriate arguments for granting the variance. The committee typically makes a decision on
the request that same day.
Staff has discussed our proposed variance request with the District State Aid Engineer.
Although we have not been able to gain any sense or feel of our chances of success, the Engineer
did convey that our request does appear to have reasonable merit for consideration. Our
argument would be based essentially on the following points:
1. Physical restrictions do not allow for widening of the road without significant hardship or
impacts to neighboring properties.
2. We are essentially performing a mill and overlay (resurfacing) rather than a complete
reconstruct.
3. The roadway has operated in its current condition and capacity for many years without
any notable safety or operational deficiencies.
If Mn/DOT does grant a variance from State Aid standards, it will be conditioned on the City
accepting any liability associated with the variance. That requirement is contained in the
attached resolution. The city Attorney has been apprised of this issue and requirement.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve the attached resolution requesting a variance from State Aid
width and parking standards for Quentin Avenue from Excelsior Boulevard to Wooddale Avenue
Attachments: Resolution
Project Location Map (Supplement)
Prepared By: Scott A. Brink, City Engineer
Reviewed By: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4i - Resolution Variance Quentin Ave
Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 06-050
RESOLUTION REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM MINNESOTA RULES FOR
STATE AID OPERATIONS CHAPTER 8820 FOR MUNICIPAL STATE AID PROJECT
NE. 163-284-007 (QUENTIN AVENUE FROM EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD TO
WOODDALE AVENUE).
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is preparing plans for the rehabilitation of
Quentin Avenue from Excelsior Boulevard to Wooddale Avenue (MSAP 163-284-01); and
WHEREAS, In accordance with the City of St. Louis Park’s Capital Improvement Plan
(C.I.P.), the pavement surface of Quentin Avenue requires rehabilitation in accordance with the
City’s Pavement Management Program; and
WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of St. Louis Park believe that the minimum
design standards set forth by Minnesota Rules for State Aid Operation 8820 as applicable to the
proposed pavement rehabilitation of Quentin Avenue create an undue hardship; and
WHEREAS, said hardship is further explained in the attached supplementary letter from
the City Engineer; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, RESOLOVED, that the City Council of
the City of St. Louis Park, located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, hereby respectfully submits a
request for a variance to the Commissioner of Transportation for Minnesota Rules for State Aid
Operations, Chapter 8820.9920, Geometric Design Standards; Rural and Suburban Undivided;
New or Reconstruction Projects, as they apply to the rehabilitation of Quentin Avenue from
Excelsior Boulevard to Wooddale Avenue, so as to allow the following:
1. The existing pavement width of 27-28 feet be allowed to remain.
2. Parking on one side of the street to be continued to be permitted as currently allowed.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park hereby indemnifies, saves, and holds harmless the State and its agents and employees, to the
extent of the City’s statutory liability limits, of and from claims, demands, actions, or causes of
action arising out of or by reason of the granting of the variance. The Council further agrees to
defend at its sole cost and expense any action or proceeding begun for asserting any claim of
whatever character arising as a result of the granting of the variance.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4j - Resolution Of Support For NORC Grant
Page 1
4j. Motion to approve a resolution supporting the Nurturing Our Retired Citizens’
(NORC) grant application to the Minnesota Department of Human Services
Background:
Nurturing our Retired Citizens (NORC) is applying for a grant dollars from the Minnesota
Department of Human Services to fund the “Congregational Nursing-Expanding Diversity,
Geography & Education” project (CN-EDGE). NORC made a presentation to the City
Council about this grant proposal at the study session on February 13, 2006.
NORC is seeking $1,000 from the City of St. Louis Park as part of a match amount needed
to apply for a $250,000 grant from the State of Minnesota. To apply, NORC must be able
to match the $250,000 through a combination of dollars and in-kind services. In-kind
services already provided by the city (staff liaisons to the NORC Steering Committee and
meeting room space) are included in the documents.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council approve a resolution supporting NORC’s application to the
state. The City’s financial commitment if the project is fully funded is anticipated to be
$1,000.
Attachments: Memorandum of Understanding
Resolution
Prepared by: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4j - Resolution Of Support For NORC Grant
Page 2
Memorandum of Understanding
Congregational Nursing – Expanding Diversity, Geography and Education
(CN-EDGE)
The organization included in this MOU has agreed to serve as a partner in applying for a
Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) Community Service/Services
Development grant to expand the diversity and geographic reach of congregational nursing
programs, while educating stakeholders such as health care providers, congregations,
seniors, and families regarding the benefits and use of congregational nursing and a wide
range of supporting resources. CN-EDGE integrates and strengthens the connections
between formal health care providers and faith congregations, creating a more cost
effective approach to helping seniors maintain their independence and remain in their
homes for a longer period of time when faced with illness and injury.
CN-EDGE will serve seniors who will benefit from the holistic care of congregational
nurses or clergy support at the time of discharge from a nursing home or other formal
health care provider. The proposed project will serve seniors in the targeted zone of a 7-
mile radius from the center of the City of St. Louis Park, to include areas of Hopkins,
Minneapolis, and Minnetonka. The project will run from July 1, 2006 – December 31,
2007.
Organization: City of St. Louis Park
Responsibilities/Actions Mayor, City Manager, Housing Authority will serve on the
NORC Steering Committee, they will provide consultation
about sustainability of congregational nurse programs
Contributions: Staff time valued at approximately $9,000, meeting room space,
$1,000 cash contribution
Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Printed name and title, signature and date
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4j - Resolution Of Support For NORC Grant
Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 06-051
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE
NURTURING OUR RETIRED CITIZENS (NORC)
GRANT APPLICATION TO THE
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES
WHEREAS, NORC has prepared a grant application to the Minnesota Department
of Human Services for the Congregational Nursing-Expanding Diversity, Geography &
Education” project (CN-EDGE) to expand the diversity and geographic reach of
congregational nursing programs; and
WHEAREAS, the City of St. Louis Park has an existing partnership with NORC
and the city provides in-kind support by serving on the NORC Steering Committee and
making meeting space available; and
WHEREAS, NORC has asked the city to be a partner in this grant application,
which meets the stewardship needs identified in the Vision St. Louis Park and would
benefit the health of St. Louis Park seniors; and
WHEREAS, the City’s total monetary contribution to the program, if fully funded
by the DHS, is expected to be $1,000 to be used for the program’s newsletter.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the St. Louis Park City Council,
Minnesota, supports the NORC Congregational Nursing-Expanding Diversity, Geography
& Education” project (CN-EDGE) grant application to the Minnesota Department of
Human Services.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4k - PRAC Minutes Nov. 16, 2005
Page 1
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION
November 16, 2005 – 7 P.M.
REC CENTER PROGRAMMING OFFICE
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kirk Hawkinson, Dick Johnson, Tom Worthington, George Foulkes,
Steve Hallfin (7:35 p.m.)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bruce Cornwall
STAFF PRESENT: Rick Birno, Carrie Haslerud
1. Call to order
Mr. Worthington, Chair, called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m.
2. Adjustments to the agenda
Mr. Birno requested “Commissioners Terms” be added to the agenda under New Business.
3. Approval of Minutes from October 26th, 2005
Mr. Worthington requested that the first sentence on page three be removed. Ms. Haslerud
noted that the print in blue on page four be removed from the October 26th minutes.
Changes noted, Mr. Johnson moved to approve the minutes of the October 26, 2005 meeting,
Mr. Foulkes seconded. The motion passed 5-0.
4. New Business
A. Facility Usage information
Mr. Birno presented the Commission with a copy of the most recent Parks and
Recreation brochure which listed the various facility rental options available. He
highlighted several of the City facilities beginning with picnic shelters (Dakota Park,
Oak Hill Park and Wolf Park) which can be rented from May 6 – September 24th. The
shelters are maintained by the Parks Department.
Mr. Birno stated that that there are four buildings (Louisiana Oaks, Oak Hill Park,
Browndale, and Nelson) that can be rented from early May – late September and one
building (Wolfe Park Pavilion) that can be rented year round. He discussed how
seasonal employee crews are available for rental services during the summer months but
not during the fall, winter and spring months. Therefore, more affordable rental fees
can be charged. He noted that the Wolfe Park shelter can be rented year-round because
of its close proximity to the Rec Center and the permanent staff available for rental
services. If a shelter (other then Wolfe Pavilion) is rented in the fall, winter or spring the
customer will be assessed the full time Parks Department staff expense to open, prep,
clean and close the building in addition to the rental rate. In response to a question from
Mr. Johnson, Mr. Birno suggested that if there is an increase in demand for off-season
rentals, staff will investigate possible ways to stream-line the process to accommodate
the requests.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4k - PRAC Minutes Nov. 16, 2005
Page 2
Mr. Birno also discussed some of the requirements for rental of the banquet room at the
Rec Center. He stated that in addition to the basic rental fee a group planning to serve
alcohol is required use the City’s licensed alcohol supplier. The City has not contracted
with a licensed food supplier and therefore rental groups hire there own food service.
The fee for the police officer during the last three hours of the event required when
alcohol is served is charged to the rental party.
In response to a question from Commissioner Johnson, Mr. Birno indicated that the
future rental opportunities at the Brick House, Westwood Nature Center, and the new
screened porch at Westwood Nature area (planned construction in 2006) are not being
considered until issues such as staffing, set-up, break down and clean up are addressed.
In response to a question from Mr. Hawkinson, Mr. Birno indicated that St. Louis Park
residents make up the majority of facility rentals. The Banquet Room is used by
residents and non-residents. Mr. Johnson inquired if usage frequency is monitored?
Mr. Birno advised that it is. Mr. Johnson suggested developing a baseline rental
revenue figure from the 2005 season and use these numbers for future year comparisons.
He felt this could be an opportunity to justify future improvements and staffing needs.
Mr. Worthington inquired as to how often rates are adjusted. Mr. Birno advised that the
fees and charges are reviewed every September and are adjusted as needed. In response
to a question from Mr. Johnson, Mr. Birno stated that fees and charges are regularly
compared to similar programs and facilities in other Cities.
B. Youth Association Meeting – Agenda & Questions
Mr. Worthington opened the discussion inquiring as to which Associations should be
invited to the next meeting and what questions should be asked. The Commission
discussed several possibilities agreeing that basic information should be presented by
each association such as: participation rates, fees and how their leagues are structured.
Mr. Hallfin explained procedures that are followed for grievances within the Little
League organization. In response to a question from Mr. Johnson, Mr. Birno
acknowledged that most Associations have similar organizational structure. Mr. Hallfin
commented that the structure of Little League is quite thorough due to the length of time
the organization has been in existence.
Mr. Johnson suggested that perhaps the City sponsor some kind of clinic for the
associations on dealing with difficult people. Mr. Foulkes commented that it probably
should not be the City’s responsibility to provide that kind of service. Mr. Worthington
advised that many youth athletic associations now hire full/part time staff to run their
athletic programs such as the BAA in Bloomington and the Chaska Soccer Association.
In response to a question from Mr. Johnson, Mr. Birno advised that all Athletic
Associations are required to fill out a facility use request form, comply to the standards
addressed in the form and provide a copy of insurance information in order make
requests for field use.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4k - PRAC Minutes Nov. 16, 2005
Page 3
The Commission reviewed and agreed on the following questions to discuss with the
Youth Athletic Associations:
§ General update from the Association
§ Description of league team structure and format
§ Participation rates and future trends?
§ Issues or concerns?
§ Future needs?
§ Update on City planned Capital Projects which impact the Association
§ Does your Association prefer the individual style meeting with the Park
Commission or the group style summit?
Mr. Hawkinson suggested that the Commission have each Association as the first
agenda item at the beginning of each meeting and the Commission agreed.
In response to a question from Mr. Foulkes, Mr. Birno advised that groups have to form
an Association in order to access facilities at no charge. Mr. Worthington added that
there is a list of requirements that Associations have to fulfill to continue use of City
owned facilities.
The Commission agreed to invite the Football Association and The Boys Traveling
Basketball Association to the January Commission meeting. Mr. Birno will have the
Parks and Recreation invite both Associations to the January 18th meeting.
After a short discussion the Commission decided that the Soccer Association will be
invited in February, Traveling Baseball in March, the Baseball Association in April, irls
Fast pitch in May and the Hockey Association in September. Mr. Birno stated that he
will put together a schedule which will be included in the January agenda. .
Mr. Hawkinson suggested inviting all of the baseball associations together. Mr. Hallfin
advised that it would be better to have each one come separately.
5. Old Business
A. 2006 CIP Projects
Mr. Birno advised the Commission that the proposed 2006 CIP has not yet been
approved by the City Council. He reviewed plans for 2006 including the Aquila Park
building improvements and fencing replacement, Westwood projects, Northside Park
improvements, Minikahda-Vista shelter and play structure replacement, Fern Hill Park
improvements and all the scheduled improvements for the year. When asked about the
budget for the 2006 CIP, Mr. Birno responded that the proposed budget is
approximately $920,000.00. Ms. Walsh will provide the Commission with a copy of
the 2006 CIP when it is approved. Mr. Birno sent the proposed copy of the CIP around
the table for the Commissioners to review.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4k - PRAC Minutes Nov. 16, 2005
Page 4
In response to a question from Mr. Hawkinson, Mr. Birno informed the Commission
that the disc golf course project is slated for the 2008 CIP budget. The location is yet to
be determined. Mr. Johnson suggested using the land by Carlson Park. Mr. Birno
commented that disc golf is unique in that it potentially fits well in many existing
locations. Mr. Worthington commented that Three Rivers Park Disrtrict charges for use
of their course.
B. Expired Terms
Mr. Birno informed the Commission that with the exception of Mr. Hawkinson, all
terms expire as of December 31. Mr. Birno inquired as to which Commissioners would
like to renew their terms. Mr. Hallfin, Mr. Worthington and Mr. Foulkes all expressed
interest in renewing their terms. Mr. Johnson declined advising that he is also on the
Bass Creek Watershed Management Commission and would prefer to serve on one
commission only. Staff will call Mr. Cornwall to verify his status. Other vacancies to
be filled are that of Mr. Strong and Ms. Lindenberg. Mr. Birno advised that he has the
names of a couple of students who might be interested in filing Ms. Lindenberg’s
vacancy. Mr. Foulkes suggested possibly contacting the woman who had applied for the
position he was assigned to see if she is still interested in serving. Mr. Worthington
requested the placement of an announcement in the Sun/Sailor.
In recognition of Mr. Johnson and his years of service on the Parks and Recreation
Advisory Commission, the Commission agreed to have lunch at Fuddruckers on
December 7th at 12:30 p.m.
The Commission agreed to not meet in December. The next meeting will be January
18, 2006.
6. Communications
A. Chair
None.
B. Commissioners
Mr. Johnson inquired as to the 2005 figures for summer operation of the pool. Mr.
Birno advised that the numbers are not all available yet but they appear to be up from
2004 which was a cool summer. There were very few storms during operation hours in
2005 so the pool was not closed very often therefore maintaining attendance along with
higher staff expenses. Mr. Birno noted that concession sales were strong as well as
group attendance and private rentals. Mr. Birno indicated that final revenue figures will
be given to the Commission in January. Mr. Foulkes suggested allowing Minneapolis
residents to have the St. Louis Park resident rate in order to increase revenue.
In response to a question from Mr. Worthington, Mr. Hallfin discussed the Hockey
Association merger. He stated that some parents feel the merger created a situation in
which there are not enough players for a ‘C’ team in St. Louis Park. He also explained
that the St. Louis Park Girls Hockey Program has always merged with an outside
Association on an annual basis. The boy’s merger created a change in which some
participants are not happy.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4k - PRAC Minutes Nov. 16, 2005
Page 5
C. Program Report – Rick Birno
Mr. Birno informed the Commission that the Browndale Park Building Grand Opening
will be December 28 at 6:00 p.m. and the Nelson Building Grand Opening will be
December 30 at 6:00 p.m. He also stated that the New Year’s Eve event time is from 2-
5:00 p.m. on December 31st.
Mr. Birno stated that the first Bee Hive meeting has been scheduled. He indicated that
the committee will be challenged to create a timeline, process, find a new location and
develop a budget for the project. In response to a question from Mr. Johnson, Mr. Birno
noted that the Bee Hive project will not involve the silo next to Nordic Ware..
Mr. Birno also noted that the Parks and Recreation 2006 Spring and Summer planning
is underway and all information must be ready to go by the end of December.
7. Adjournment
Moved by Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Hawkinson to adjourn. The motion passed
5-0. With no further business the Commission adjourned at 8:43 p.m.
Minutes prepared and
respectfully submitted by,
Carrie Haslerud
Recording Secretary
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4l - Fire Civil Service Minutes Aug. 3, 2005
Page 1
MINUTES
FIRE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
August 3, 2005 – 8:00 a.m.
FIRE CONFERENCE ROOM, 1ST FLOOR CITY HALL
1) The meeting was called to order at 8:00 a.m. by President MacMillan.
2) In attendance were Commission President William MacMillan, Commissioners David Lee
and Marjorie Douville. Also present were Ali Fosse, Human Resources Coordinator/Staff
Liaison; Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief; Mark Windschitl, Battalion Chief; and Bill Ryan, Union
President.
3) A motion was made by Commissioner Douville, seconded by Commissioner Lee to accept
the minutes from the May 11, 2005 meeting. The motion carried unanimously.
4) Chief Stemmer updated the Commission on the status of the vacant Lieutenant positions.
One of the names certified, William Ryan, has declined certification.
5) A motion was made by Commissioner Lee, seconded by Commissioner Douville to accept,
with regret, Bill Ryan’s letter removing him from the Fire Lieutenant Eligibility Roster.
Motion carried unanimously.
6) Chief Stemmer also explained that budget changes have allowed the Chief to bring the
department back to full staff with 5 Lieutenants (we currently have 3). There is only one
remaining name certified on the eligibility roster. Therefore, the Commissioners need to
certify the next three names on the list to fill the 2 vacant positions.
7) A motion was made by Commissioner Lee, seconded by Commissioner Douville to certify
the next 2 highest names on the Firefighter Eligibility Register (Peter Ludwig and Steven
Powers) to join currently certified Bob Hampton to fill the first Fire Lieutenant vacancy, with
the understanding that upon filling the position, the next highest name on the list (Shawn
Glapa) will be automatically certified to fill the second vacancy. The motion carried
unanimously.
8) Other business: Chief Stemmer updated the Commission on the status of the vacant
Firefighter position. A conditional offer has been made to one of the candidates on the
Eligibility Roster. The candidate’s start date is pending physical, background, and
psychological testing. Upon appointment, the department will be at full staff.
9) A motion was made by Commissioner Douville, seconded by Commissioner Lee to adjourn
the meeting. The Commission adjourned at 8:12 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Ali Fosse
City Staff Liaison to the Fire Civil Service Commission
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4m - HA Board Minutes Jan. 11, 2006
Page 1
MINUTES
Housing Authority
St. Louis Park City Hall, Westwood Room
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Wednesday, January 11, 2005
5:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Catherine Courtney, Steve Fillbrandt and Judith
Moore. Commissioner Anne Mavity arrived at 5:05 p.m.
STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Anderson, Jane Klesk, Kathy Larsen, Kevin Locke and
Michele Schnitker.
1. Call to Order
Commissioner Courtney called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes for December, 2005
The December 14, 2005 minutes were unanimously approved.
3. Hearings
a. Housing Authority Annual Agency Plan 2006
Ms. Schnitker explained that the HA Annual Agency Plan is meant to serve as a
planning tool for the HA, a community guide to the HA’s policies, programs and
activities, and a streamlined submission to HUD of grant and programmatic
information. The Public Hearing was opened at 5:10 p.m. Since no one was
present to provide comments, the Public Hearing was closed at 5:10 p.m.
4. Reports and Committees – None
5. Unfinished Business – None
6. New Business
a. PHA Certifications of Compliance with the PHA Plans and Related Regulations,
Resolution No. 542
Ms. Schnitker noted that prior to submission of the Agency Plan, the HA must
certify that the Plan is consistent with the jurisdiction’s Consolidated Plan, that
the HA held a Public Hearing to discuss the Plan and that it was available for
viewing, that the HA established a Resident Advisory Board to discuss the Plan,
and that the HA will affirmatively further fair housing and comply with the
prohibition against discrimination. Commissioner Moore moved to approve
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4m - HA Board Minutes Jan. 11, 2006
Page 2
Resolution No. 542, PHA Certifications of Compliance with the PHA Plans and
Regulated Regulations: Board
Resolution to Accompany the Streamlined Annual PHA Plan, and Commissioner
Fillbrandt seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0, with Commissioners
Courtney, Fillbrandt, Mavity and Moore voting in favor.
b. Contract Extension – Discount Loan Program
Ms. Larsen provided the Board with background on the Discount Loan Program,
explaining that the HA’s contract with Center for Energy and Environment, the
program loan administrator, is currently up for review and approval.
Commissioner Mavity moved for approval of the execution of the Contract for
Discount Loan Program with Center for Energy and Environment for professional
services to provide loan administration services at a fee of $125.00 per loan,
through December 31, 2006. Commissioner Moore seconded the motion, and the
motion passed 4-0, with Commissioners Courtney, Fillbrandt, Mavity and Moore
voting in favor.
c. Housing Matrix – Housing Types, Numbers and Goals
Ms. Larsen presented the draft Housing Matrix for Commissioner review and
comments. The matrix spreadsheet reflects the current status of housing types in
St. Louis Park. Based on input from the HA Board, City Council, Planning
Commission and other city staff, the matrix will be revised.
d. Approval of Family Self-Sufficiency Contract with RESOURCE, Inc.
Ms. Schnitker stated that although the Board had previously approved entering
into a contract with Jewish Vocational Services (JVS) to administer the TRAILS
program for 2006, RESOURCE, Inc. came forward with a proposal that was felt
to be in the HA’s, coordinator’s, and the participants’ best interests. After further
discussion the HA and JVS mutually agreed to rescind their contract.
Commissioner Mavity moved to rescind the Family Self-Sufficiency Contract
with Jewish Vocational Services, and for approval of the Second Amendment to
the Agreement Between the Housing Authority of St. Louis Park and
RESOURCE, Inc. (Employment Action Center), to administer the TRAILS
program from January 1 through December 31, 2006 at an annual cost not to
exceed $21,639.43. Commissioner Fillbrandt seconded the motion and the
motion passed 4-0, with Commissioners Courtney, Fillbrandt, Mavity and Moore
voting in favor.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4m - HA Board Minutes Jan. 11, 2006
Page 3
e. Review of Public Housing and Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Waiting List
Preferences
Ms. Schnitker reviewed the current local preferences established to provide
housing priorities for applicants on the HA’s waiting lists for both Section 8 and
Public Housing. The Commissioners decided not to make changes to the waiting
list preferences at this time and asked that this item be included on the February
meeting agenda for further discussion.
7. Communications from Executive Director
a. Claims List January - 2006
Commissioner Moore moved for ratification of Claims List No. 1-2006, and
Commissioner Mavity seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0, with
Commissioners Courtney, Fillbrandt, Mavity and Moore voting in favor.
b. Communications
1. Monthly Report for January, 2006
2. Scattered Site Houses and Hamilton House (verbal report)
3. Draft Financial Statements - Report
8. Other
9. Adjournment
Commissioner Fillbrandt moved to adjourn the meeting, and Commissioner Moore
seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0, with Commissioners Courtney, Fillbrandt,
Mavity and Moore voting in favor. The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne Mavity, Secretary
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4n - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 18, 2006
Page 1
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
January 18, 2006 -- 6:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynn Carper, Robert Kramer, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian
MEMBERS ABSENT: Claudia Johnston-Madison, Dennis Morris
STAFF PRESENT: Adam Fulton, Kathy Larsen, Meg McMonigal, Gary Morrison,
Nancy Sells, Sean Walther
1. Call to order - Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of December 21, 2005 and January 4, 2006
Chair Carper reported that the outcome of the vote is missing for Item 5A, page 5 of the
minutes of December 21st. Staff will correct the minutes to reflect that the vote was 5-0
recommending approval of the Hoigaard Final PUD and Plat with conditions.
Commissioner Robertson moved approval of the minutes for December 21, 2005 as
corrected and Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote
of 4-0.
Commissioner Kramer moved approval of the minutes of January 4, 2006 and
Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
3. Hearings:
A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change land use designation from Park to
Low Density Residential
Location: 7701 Edgebrook Drive
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 05-71-CP
Adam Fulton, Associate Planner, introduced Kathy Larsen, Housing Program
Coordinator. Ms. Larsen presented a brief overview of the Excess Land Process which
began in January 2005. Ms. Larsen said on December 5, 2005, the City Council
approved resolutions to begin the process to sell nine of the parcels for single-family
homes.
Mr. Fulton presented the staff report.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4n - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 18, 2006
Page 2
Chair Carper asked if the parcel at 7701 Edgebrook Drive is an active park. Ms. Larsen
said the Park department determined the parcel is not required for the park system.
Chair Carper asked about reserving some area for pedestrians’ right-of-way. Ms. Larsen
said access to the park is not a hardship. Commissioner Timian remarked that many
people access the park through the alleyway. Commissioners Timian and Robertson
stated that they were members of the Excess Land Task Force. They said the task force
looked at park issues when analyzing this parcel. Commissioner Robertson said this
parcel would make a great single-family home lot.
Chair Carper opened the public hearing.
Paula Barrett, 7618 Edgebrook Drive, lives across the street from the park. She said she
was concerned about parking. Ms. Barrett’s home was built in 1890 and she asked if any
thought has been given to what type of home will be built. She commented that there is a
lot of train noise and train vibration in the block.
Ms. Larsen said the Park department will monitor park use once the house is built. The
Park department believes there will be adequate parking. Ms. Larsen said the City
Council has established design guidelines for the parcels to address compatibility with
neighborhoods. A design review committee will determine design criteria. Parties
interested in purchasing this parcel will be made aware of the train noise.
Chair Carper closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan for 7701 Edgebrook Drive from P to Low Density Residential.
Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
B. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change land use designation from Park to
Low Density Residential
Location: 9019 Cedar Lake Road
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 05-72-CP
Mr. Fulton presented the staff report.
Chair Carper asked about public access to Hannon Lake. Gary Morrison, Assistant
Zoning Administrator, said there is some access on the west side of the lake.
Mr. Fulton said the parcel will come before the Planning Commission again as it needs to
be platted. The current request is for a change in land designation only.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4n - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 18, 2006
Page 3
Commissioner Timian asked if the steep terrain would be a problem in developing this
property. Ms. Larsen said it would be a challenge. Meg McMonigal, Planning and
Zoning Supervisor, said the intent is to have a private developer look at it and determine
how best to develop it.
Chair Carper opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, Chair
Carper closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan for a portion of 9019 Cedar Lake Road from Parks to Low Density
Residential. Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote
of 4-0.
C. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change land use designation from Park to
Low Density Residential
Location: 2715 Monterey Avenue South
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 05-73-CP
Mr. Fulton presented the staff report.
Chair Carper asked about the odd configuration of the lot. Mr. Fulton said it is due to a
railroad right-of-way, which was vacated many years ago. Mr. Fulton said a utility
easement would not prevent building on this lot.
Chair Carper opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, Chair
Carper closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan for 2715 Monterey Ave. S. from Park to Low Density Residential.
Commissioner Timian seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
4. Other Business
A. Zoning Text Amendments for residential setbacks
(Amendment A. 4 front yard)
Case No.: 05-69-ZA
Ms. McMonigal distributed a revised report.
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. He discussed Alternative #1—Neighbor’s
Existing Front Yard and Alternative #2—Established Front Yard Limit, With Exceptions.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4n - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 18, 2006
Page 4
Mr. Morrison discussed Chair Carper’s request regarding setbacks on Parklands Road and
Forest Road, explaining that it was difficult to establish setbacks on these streets.
Chair Carper thanked Mr. Morrison for his extra work on this area.
Commissioner Robertson said he believes exceptions are not necessary on curvy, hilly
streets because homes are set differently from the street and are all over the “board”
anyway. The 30 or 35 foot setback could be applied.
Chair Carper asked when other types of streets are considered, where does one look to
determine the natural dividing points? He asked how other areas would be added to the
amendment and how the cutoff point would be determined.
Mr. Morrison replied that one way would be to establish the intent of the ordinance. Staff
was concerned about the historic nature of the postwar homes having been built in
straight lines. Mr. Morrison said the scope could be broadened. A subset or a
recommendation could be added as this moves forward to the Council. It would be easy
to amend.
Chair Carper stated that the public hearing did not need to be reopened.
Commissioner Robertson said staff did a very nice job of working with the Planning
Commission’s concerns about Alternative #1. He said Alternative #2 is a good solution.
Commissioner Kramer said going forward there will be a certain amount of higher
maintenance with the amendment, but it seemed worthwhile and logical. Commissioner
Kramer asked for clarification regarding those blocks that have a smaller setback.
Mr. Morrison responded that the basic setback in the R2 District is 25 feet, but for these
exceptions everyone would be able to add at least five feet.
Commissioner Kramer said he is in favor of this because it is a sensitive approach as
opposed to arbitrary.
Commissioner Robertson added that Alternative #2 is user friendly. Ms. McMonigal said
the Planning Department can easily help people under this alternative.
Chair Carper thanked the Planning Department and the Planning Commission for their
work on the amendment.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the amendment to
the zoning ordinance adopting Alternative #2—Establishing Front Yard Limits, With
Exceptions. Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote
of 4-0.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4n - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 18, 2006
Page 5
5. Communications
A. BOZA agenda Jan. 5, 2006
B. Sean Walther, the new Senior Planner, was introduced to the Commission.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m.
Minutes prepared by, Respectfully submitted,
Linda Samson Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary Administrative Secretary
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4o - Telecommunications Minutes Dec. 8, 2005
Page 1
OFFICIAL MINUTES
ST. LOUIS PARK TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
MEETING OF DECEMBER 8, 2005
ST. LOUIS PARK COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rick Dworsky, Dale Hartman, Mary Jean Overend and Rolf Peterson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bruce Browning, Ken Huiras and Bob Jacobson,
STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator; John McHugh, Community
TV Coordinator
OTHERS PRESENT: Arlen Mattern, Time Warner Cable Public Affairs Administrator
1. Call to Order
Chair Dworsky called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM.
2. Roll Call
Present at roll call were Commissioners Dworsky, Hartman, Overend and Peterson.
3. Approval of Minutes for October 6, 2005
Commissioner Peterson indicated it should note he abstained on the motion to approve
the July 26, 2005 minutes.
It was moved by Commissioner Peterson, seconded by Commissioner Hartman, to
approve the minutes of October 6, 2005, without changes.
The motion passed 4-0.
4. Adoption of Agenda
It was moved by Commissioner Overend, seconded by Commissioner Peterson, to
approve the agenda.
The motion passed 4-0.
5. Public Comment - None
6. New Business
A. Time Warner presentation on new cable rates
Mr. Dunlap indicated most rates were going up $2.30 to $3.00 (not including 5%
franchise fee and 6.5% Minnesota sales tax) and reviewed the changes in packages. The
increase was about 5%, similar to what the industry had done the last few years and
similar to Comcast’s proposed increase. Converter boxes, Road Runner, digital telephone
and the movie pack, sports pack and single premium channel prices were not going up.
The trip charge for a technician to come to your home had dropped, as well as the hourly
service charge for custom work.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4o - Telecommunications Minutes Dec. 8, 2005
Page 2
Chair Dworsky asked the rationale for the increase and what the customer could expect?
Mr. Mattern replied the increase was for operating expenses, and that quality of
programming was also a major factor.
Commissioner Hartman expressed a concern about paying for sports channels when
people didn’t view them as well as channels that had a lot of infomercials. Mr. Mattern
responded sports channels were very popular which was why there were so many.
Commissioner Hartman suggested programs running between 6-9 PM should be repeated
later in the evening. Mr. Mattern replied they didn’t control the programming.
Mr. Dunlap indicated companies were considering a la carte more and as well as offering
more tiers such as a family tier.
B. Review School District reports
Mr. Dunlap stated the $31,500 that went to the School District late last year, as part of an
equipment grant from Time Warner had not been spent. The proposal was to upgrade the
senior high studio facility. They were waiting to see what happened with the proposal for
Pavek Museum and whether or not they could go forward with putting a community TV
studio there. They upgraded the NASA TV signal to digital. They were going to do a
pilot project sending video over their fiber and use the Central Community Center and the
Spanish Immersion School as the test case because there was presently no cable service
there. They were getting a tremendous amount of programming from Susan Lindgren
School, as well as programs from the Senior High, Aquilla and Peter Hobart.
Chair Dworsky asked a time frame for the Pavek Museum? Mr. McHugh replied he
would include that in the renewal update.
C. Set meetings for 2006
The Commission set the 2006 meeting schedule as follows: January 19, February 9
(Annual meeting), March 27th tentatively (Joint meeting with City Council), May 4,
August 3, October 5 and December 7.
Mr. Dunlap indicated he would report back if there were conflicts with room availability.
D. Work Plan for 2006
Mr. Dunlap suggested the Commission use this time to suggest additional items. They
will host a meeting January 19th to discuss the City’s website and improvements the
public would like to see. The City hired a new web master and they are considering
video streaming of City Council meetings and adding other features. The Commission
could combine this with the annual meeting.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4o - Telecommunications Minutes Dec. 8, 2005
Page 3
Chair Dworsky asked if there was a way to solicit input and let people know how to
provide suggestions? Mr. Dunlap replied they could call him with input or send an email.
Chair Dworsky suggested a link be provided on the website for people to comments.
Commissioner Peterson asked about the visioning on the January 19th schedule? Mr.
Dunlap replied Martha McDonell, the facilitator, would be discussing it after the meeting.
He described the Vision St. Louis Park process. They will begin running a DVD of the
process on Channel 17 in the next week or two.
7. Old Business
A. Franchise Renewal Update
Mr. McHugh reported the renewal would be going before City Council on December
19th. It had been continued several times. The discussions were now between legal
counsel, which was a good sign and they were close to finalizing language. Another
issue was how long the existing television production studio would be available before
replacement and possibility of using the Pavek Museum.
Chair Dworsky asked if there was a time frame? Mr. McHugh replied December 19, 2005.
A letter was received from the Pavek Museum of Broadcasting regarding the proposed
studio and their conditions for using it. The City needed to provide liability insurance. The
Pavek Museum needed to be able to use the studio for their purposes and the City would
need to schedule around museum use. The television production studio would be a new
addition, which was driving their interest to use for school field trips. A concern was
where they would put the studio and it would probably require a City variance. He hoped
there would be progress before the Commission meeting on January 19th.
B. Transfer of cable system from Time Warner to Comcast
Mr. Dunlap reported the transfer would be going to Council on December 19th with the
franchise renewal. Fridley, Shakopee and Bloomington had all approved a transfer to
Comcast. Minneapolis was not as close and had presented several conditions.
Commissioner Peterson asked what kind of conditions other cities proposed? Mr. Dunlap
replied Bloomington went with St. Louis Park on a franchise fee review. Bloomington’s
was conditioned that the franchise fee would be wrapped up to their satisfaction.
Shakopee’s conditions weren’t extraordinary. Minneapolis had presented several pages
of conditions, such as Comcast specifically stating there would be no impact to customers
after the transfer happened and rates would not go up as a result of the transfer. There
were a series of things Comcast had to provide to the City of Minneapolis in writing
within 30 days.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4o - Telecommunications Minutes Dec. 8, 2005
Page 4
C. St. Louis Park Wi-Fi pilot project update
Mr. McHugh indicated the City had done research on wireless options. One of the driving
factors was for the City to use wireless connectivity as opposed to on going monthly
payments to an independent provider. Public Safety and public services would test this to
make sure it worked in the field. Use for residents would go along with that. City Council
had recently chosen to go ahead with a pilot project, which would be done in four residential
areas (not chosen yet), a business area and a multiple unit dwelling. The timeline would be
to select pilot areas in end of January, beginning of February. Evaluation would happen in
April and May, concluding with a survey of users in May. After the evaluation, Council
would decide if they wanted to go citywide. The pilot project would cost less than $300,000,
which will be an internal loan from the Economic Development Fund. If rollout were done
citywide, it was estimated to cost around $4.4 million.
Chair Dworsky asked when the Council would decide? Mr. McHugh replied the end of May.
8. Reports
A. Complaints
Chair Dworsky indicated many of the complaints were regarding emergency broadcasting
tests. What should viewers expect and what was the difference between analog and
digital and the frequency? Mr. Dunlap replied that Time Warner had recently provided
answers for the complainant. A Time Warner engineer indicated many of the cable
channels on standard cable are part of an advertising system. If you are on one of those
channels, during the alert system tests (generated monthly), there is a crawl at the bottom
of the screen and you can still see your program. One of the exceptions was Turner
Classic Movies, TCM. TCM shows a full screen graphic for 20-30 seconds saying a test
was underway. Time Warner expects to replace the emergency alert system component
that causes this problem by the end of the year and the customer was satisfied to hear
that.
Chair Dworsky asked Mr. Mattern to report about complaints 4, 5 and 6. On complaint
number four, it concerned him that it noted no supervisor was available.
Mr. Mattern stated the supervisor was possibly on the phone with another customer or
away from their desk. This customer had an account that was still past due and he
believed they went over and above for them. They were supposed to get back to the
customer on #5, but had been provided with the wrong address and phone number and
couldn’t get back to the customer. On compliant #6, work had been done, but the
customer hadn’t checked before calling.
Commissioner Hartman indicated Channels 63-69 had been experiencing an intermittent
interference problem between 9-10 PM that made it difficult to watch.
Mr. Mattern responded he could have someone check the area.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 4o - Telecommunications Minutes Dec. 8, 2005
Page 5
Commissioner Peterson stated he had seen the same problems and added he could faintly
see another channel. It was very intermittent.
Mr. Mattern stated he would have the channels monitored.
Commissioner Overend indicated she had noticed problems with audio on Channel 17
with the School Board meetings.
Commissioner Peterson replied they have a different microphone system and School
Board members need to hold the microphone button down when speaking. Sometimes
they don’t remember to do that. They are looking at improving their broadcasts.
9. Communication from the Chair
Chair Dworsky indicated channel WGN exchanged their satellite. Was that an improvement?
Mr. Dunlap replied yes, the customer who complained said it was definitely improved.
10. Communications from City Staff
Mr. McHugh stated Channel 15 programming had a catastrophic failure of two DVD
jukeboxes. A DVD changer was on order. If it works, they will order more. Plan “B”
was to alternate programming with the remaining jukebox and video server and VCR’s. .
He provided a list of Channel 15 programs produced so far this year.
11. Adjournment
Commissioner Peterson made a motion, Commission Overend seconded to adjourn at
7:58. The motion passed.
Respectfully submitted by:
Amy L. Stegora-Peterson
Recording Secretary
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 5a - Appointments To Commissions
Page 1
5a. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions
Recommended
Action:
Motion to appoint two citizen representatives to the Police
Advisory Commission.
Background:
The City Council interviewed Hans Widmer and James Smith on February 13, 2006 for
two remaining vacancies on the Police Advisory Commission. After the interviews,
Council discussed the candidates at length and agreed to make appointments to the Police
Advisory Commission at the February 21, 2006 meeting.
The Police Advisory Commission has two mid-term openings. Both terms expire on
December 31, 2007. When a vacancy occurs in the middle of the term, the Council may
appoint a citizen representative to complete the remainder of the term. If appointed, the
new commissioners would serve until December 31, 2007.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that Council make a motion to appoint two citizen representatives to
serve on the Police Advisory Commission until December 31, 2007.
Prepared By: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant
Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 1
6a. Public Hearing to Consider Allocation of 2006 Community Development Block
Grant Funds (CDBG) and Proposed Reallocation of $57,500 of 2004 CDBG
Funds
Resolution approving the proposed use of $213,302 of 2006 Urban Hennepin County
CDBG Funds, reallocation of 2004 funds, and authorizing execution of Subrecipient
Agreement with Hennepin County and any related Third Party Agreements.
Recommended
Action:
Mayor to close the public hearing. Motion to adopt the
Resolution approving proposed use of funds for 2006 Urban
Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant funds,
reallocation of 2004 funds, and authorizing execution of
Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County and any related
Third Party Agreements
BACKGROUND:
The City will receive approximately $213,302 in federal CDBG funds in 2006 through Hennepin
County which is $5,000 less than last year. In 2005 cities had been advised that CDBG funding
would be severely cut and potentially eliminated – this did not occur.
The City’s allocation is based on the HUD formula using the City’s share of three factors for
Urban Hennepin County: 1) population; 2) number of persons with incomes at or below poverty;
and 3) overcrowded housing units. The national objectives of the program are:
• Benefit low and moderate-income persons (moderate is defined as up to 80% of median
income or $58,000 for a family of four, and low is defined as up to 50% of median income or
$38,350 for a family of four in 2005).
• Prevention or elimination of slum or blight.
• Meet a particular urgent community development need.
The City Council has focused CDBG funds to address sticks and bricks improvements to the
housing stock for low-income families, both single-family owners and multifamily housing
residents. In the past years a small portion of funds have been allocated to support services for
St. Louis Park Housing Authority residents. The St. Louis Park Housing Authority reviewed the
proposed allocation at its February 8, 2006 meeting.
1. PROPOSED 2006 CDBG ALLOCATION
The proposed activities for the allocation of CDBG funds reflect the priorities described in
Vision St. Louis Park and the Economic Development Strategic Plan for Housing and Business
and the City housing goals developed through the Housing Summit and approved by Council in
2005. Outlined in the following table are proposed activities and their respective budget
amounts.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 2
Table 1: Proposed 2006 Allocation - $213,302
Activity Project City Admin Budget
Emergency Repair Program - single family housing rehabilitation $52,372 $4,930 $57,302
Housing Land Trust - acquisition single family housing $17,000 $1,500 $18,500
Multifamily Rehabilitation - rental housing rehab $78,000 $2,000 $80,000
St. Louis Park Emergency Program (STEP)- acquisition assistance $51,800 $5,700 $57,500
Total $199,172 $14,130 $213,302
This year’s proposed allocation would fund: single family housing rehab; single family
acquisition; multifamily housing rehab; and reallocation to assist STEP with acquisition of a
building. The project activities are described in the attached February 13 Study Session Report.
2. PROPOSED REALLOCATION OF 2004 FUNDS - $57,500
The CDBG funding cycle results in expenditures from three grant years in any given calendar
year. Reallocation of funds from one project to another allows the flexibility to ensure
community needs are met as they arise and funds are expended. Staff suggest that reallocation of
2004 funds be included with the 2006 grant year resolution.
In 2004, $57,500 was allocated to assist STEP with purchase of a building for the food shelf,
emergency services and counseling for low-income residents. However, as STEP has not yet
located a building to purchase, the 2004 funding needs to be reallocated to another activity. (The
2006 funding for this activity will replace the original allocation.)
Proposed Revision to 2004 Reallocation
Staff had originally proposed that $57,500 be used to fund the single family housing rehab
through the County administered deferred loan program as noted in the February 13 Council
report. However, since the last report, staff has evaluated a request from Wayside House, and
recommends that $33,000 of the 2004 reallocation be used to fund urgently needed building
repairs at their facility located at 3705 Park Center Boulevard.
Wayside House Improvement: $34,500
Wayside House has requested CDBG funds for emergency repairs to their facility at 3705 Park
Center Boulevard. Facility improvements for agencies serving homeless low income persons is
an eligible CDBG activity and is consistent with the County’s highest priority for CDBG funds.
Wayside House provides transitional supportive housing to recovering chemically dependent
low-income women, or women and their children.
Wayside House is undergoing a strategic planning process that includes analysis of remaining at
their current site, the cost effectiveness of major building rehab, and relocation considerations.
In the meantime, the building needs the following urgently needed repairs:
• $18,000 for carpet replacement. A citation from the MN Health Department provides
Wayside until April of 2006 to make this safety related improvement.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 3
• $7,500 for replacement of the water heater. The water heater has not failed, but is estimated
to have less than 1-year life remaining.
• $7,500 for parking lot and pot-hole repair.
• $1,500 for city administrative costs.
Wayside House is motivated to make these improvements in the very near future and has
contracted with a professional property management and maintenance company that would
provide oversight for the bidding and construction process. Wayside is confident 2004 funds
could be expended by the June 2004 deadline.
Single Family Rehabilitation Deferred Loans - $24,000
The proposed amount to be reallocated to this activity has been reduced to fund the Wayside
improvements. This is the primary ongoing CDBG rehab loan program targeted for homeowners
with annual income of 50% or less of the median area income, or $38,850 for a household of 4,
and assets less than $25,000. The rehab focuses on improvements to bring homes into code
compliance and provide long-term maintenance free housing. The maximum loan amount is
$25,000 and is forgiven after 15 years. Repayment is required if homeowners sell the property
before the 15-year period expires.
The reallocation will provide funding for one additional home, and eight homes are currently in
process, with funding secured. In the event additional funds would be required for this activity,
future reallocations could be considered.
Staff recommends approving the proposed reallocation of 2004 funds to Wayside House and the
Single Family Rehabilitation Deferred Loans
Next Steps:
After the public hearing on February 22, 2005 and authorization of the proposed CDBG funding
by the Council, staff will submit the Request for Funding to Hennepin County.
Recommendation:
Motion to adopt the Resolution approving the proposed use of 2005 Urban Hennepin County
Community Development Block Grant funds and proposed reallocation of 2004 funds, and
authorizing execution of Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County and any related Third
Party Agreements.
Attachments: Resolution
February 13, 2006 Study Session Memo regarding 2006 CDBG Funds
Prepared by: Kathy Larsen, Housing Programs Coordinator
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 4
RESOLUTION NO. 06-_____
RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED USE OF FUNDS FOR 2006
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
PROGRAM FUNDS, REALLOCATION OF 2004 FUNDS,
AND
AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENTS WITH
HENNEPIN COUNTY AND ANY THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, through execution of a Joint Cooperation
Agreement with Hennepin County, is cooperating in the Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant program; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park developed a proposal for the use of 2006 Urban
Hennepin County CDBG funds made available to it; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park held a public hearing on February 21, 2006 to
obtain the views of citizens on local and urban Hennepin County housing and community
development needs and priorities for the City’s proposed use of $213,302 from the 2006 Urban
Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of St. Louis Park approves the following
projects for funding from the 2006 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block
Grant Program and authorizes submittal of the proposal to Hennepin County.
BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota approves the
reallocation of Community Development Block Grant funds by reallocating 2004 funds as
follows: $57,500 from the STEP facility acquisition to the Wayside House Treatment facility
improvements ($33,000) and single family emergency repair program, ($24,500).
Project Budget
Emergency Repair Program - single family housing rehabilitation $57,302
Housing Land Trust - acquisition single family housing $18,500
Multifamily Rehabilitation - rental housing rehab $80,000
St. Louis Park Emergency Program (STEP)- acquisition assistance $57,500
Total $213,302
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 5
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby authorizes and directs the
Mayor and its City Manager to execute a Subrecipient Agreement and any required Third Party
Agreements on behalf of the City to implement the 2006 CDBG program.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 6
Staff Report from February 13, 2006 Study Session – CDBG Allocation
6. Grant Year 2006 Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Funds Proposed Allocation
Community
Development
PURPOSE OF REPORT:
The purpose of this report is to provide information to the Council on the proposed annual
CDBG funding allocation for the 2006 CDBG program prior to the CDBG Public Hearing of
February 21, 2006. The 2006 CDBG grant year runs from July 1, 2006 through December 31,
2007.
BACKGROUND
The City will receive approximately $213,302 in federal CDBG funds in 2006 through Hennepin
County which is $5,000 less than last year. In 2005 cities had been advised that CDBG funding
would be severely cut and potentially eliminated – this did not occur.
The City’s allocation is based on the HUD formula using the City’s share of three factors for
Urban Hennepin County: 1) population; 2) number of persons with incomes at or below poverty;
and 3) overcrowded housing units. The national objectives of the program are:
• Benefit low and moderate-income persons (moderate is defined as up to 80% of median
income or $58,000 for a family of four, and low is defined as up to 50% of median income or
$38,350 for a family of four in 2005).
• Prevention or elimination of slum or blight.
• Meet a particular urgent community development need.
The City Council has focused CDBG funds to address sticks and bricks improvements to the
housing stock for low-income families, both single-family owners and multifamily housing
residents. In the past years a small portion of funds have been allocated to support services for
St. Louis Park Housing Authority residents.
The St. Louis Park Housing Authority (SLPHA) will be reviewing the proposed allocation at its
February 8, 2006, meeting.
3. PROPOSED 2006 CDBG ALLOCATION
The proposed activities for the allocation of CDBG funds reflect the priorities described in
Vision St. Louis Park and the Economic Development Strategic Plan for Housing and Business
and the City housing goals developed through the Housing Summit and approved by Council in
2005.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 7
Table 1: Proposed 2006 Allocation - $213,302
Activity Project $ City Admin Budget
Emergency Repair Program - single family housing rehabilitation $52,372 $4,930 $57,302
Housing Land Trust - acquisition single family housing $17,000 $1,500 $18,500
Multifamily Rehabilitation - rental housing rehab $78,000 $2,000 $80,000
St. Louis Park Emergency Program (STEP)- acquisition assistance $51,800 $5,700 $57,500
Total $199,172 $14,130 $213,302
This year’s proposed allocation would fund: single family housing rehab; single family
acquisition; multifamily housing rehab; and reallocation to assist STEP with acquisition of a
building. The project activities are described below.
Emergency Repair Program – Single Family $57,302
This program is consistent with the Council’s focus on stick and bricks and has proven its
responsiveness to low-income seniors and vulnerable residents with annual incomes of 50% or
less of the median area income, ($26,850 for a single household) and assets less than $25,000.
This project provides grants of up to $4,000 for emergencies such as leaking roofs and water
heaters. This level of funding would provide grants to eighteen residents. Community Action
Partnership for Suburban Hennepin County (CAPSH) currently administers this program for the
City.
Housing Land Trust - $18,500
Homes within Reach (HWR) is also known as the West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land
Trust. The goal of this private non-profit is to provide ownership opportunities for working
households in suburban Hennepin County. The buyer pays for the cost of the home only and the
land trust purchases the land which it then leases to the buyer for 99 years. Homebuyers must
have incomes at or below 80% of the median area income, or $58,500 for a household of four.
When the HWR homes are sold the seller receives 35% of the appreciation of the home, the
house is then resold to another income qualified owner who leases the land from the HWR. The
use of the land trust ensures that public money supports the long-term affordability of homes,
compared to previous affordable housing models that benefited only the first buyers.
HWR was founded in 2001 and has purchased and sold 17 homes in the cities of Minnetonka,
Richfield, New Hope, Wayzata and Eden Prairie. HWR also leverages funds with the MN
Housing Finance Agency, Hennepin County Affordable Housing Incentive Funds, HOME funds
and the Metropolitan Council. This project is consistent with the Council’s focus on using
CDBG funds for sticks and bricks activities.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 8
Multifamily Housing Rehab – $80,000
This project is consistent with the focus of CDBG funds to assist with capital improvements of
housing for low-income residents. Generally, the lowest income residents live in housing
provided by private non-profit affordable and supportive housing providers and the St. Louis
Park Housing Authority. Funding for housing for the lowest-income renters concurs with
Hennepin County’s CDBG highest funding priority.
On December 19, 2005, Council passed a resolution directing staff to prepare the required
documents to provide a $400,000 deferred loaned to the Louisiana Court Limited Partnership to
assist with capital improvements at Louisiana Court. The stabilization plan developed by Project
for Pride in Living with input from the City, County, MHFA and banker includes capital
improvements to decrease maintenance costs and improve occupancy rates. At Council’s
direction $80,000 of 2006 grant year funds could be combined with $194, 000 of 2005 grant year
funds to finance 70% of the deferred loan. The remainder will be financed with TIF from the
Park Center TIF District.
St. Louis Park Emergency Program (STEP) – Acquisition Assistance - $57,500
CDBG funds of $57,500 are proposed to assist STEP with the purchase of a building for the food
shelf, emergency services and counseling for low-income residents. This funding was proposed
in 2004. However as STEP has not yet located a building to purchase, the 2004 funding needs to
be reallocated to another activity, and the 2006 funding will replace the original allocation.
The STEP relocation committee has a two-fold need for continuing the search for a permanent
home for STEP. First, of course, is the recognition that the City leased Soomech building is not
a permanent solution. Secondly, the STEP Board has been advised by their capital fund raising
consultant that securing a building is essential to fund raising; people are more willing to donate
for a building they can see, than a property to be determined. Staff will keep Council apprised of
the relocation search activity.
City Administrative Costs - $14,130
In the past CDBG funding was fully expended for project activity and staff administrative time
was funded by the General Fund or Housing Rehabilitation Fund. Since the budget cuts of 2003,
staff administrative time related to CDBG activity has been reimbursed with CDBG funding.
The proposed 2006 allocation continues this practice and reflects actual city administrative costs.
4. PROPOSED REALLOCATION OF 2004 FUNDS - $57,500
The CDBG funding cycle results in expenditures from three grant years in any given calendar
year. Reallocation of funds from one grant year to another allows the flexibility to ensure
community needs are met as they arise and funds are expended. Staff suggest that reallocation of
2004 funds be included with the 2006 grant year resolution.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6a - CDBG Public Hearing & Resolution
Page 9
There is a balance of $57,500 to assist STEP with acquisition of a building that will not be spent
by June 2006. Staff proposes this money be reallocated to single family housing rehab through
the County administered deferred loan program.
Single Family Rehabilitation Deferred Loans - $57,500
This is the primary ongoing CDBG rehab loan program targeted for homeowners with annual
income of 50% or less of the median area income, or $38,850 for a household of 4, and assets
less than $25,000. The rehab focuses on improvements to bring homes into code compliance and
provide long-term maintenance free housing. The maximum loan amount is $25,000 and is
forgiven after 15 years. Repayment is required if homeowners sell the property before the 15-
year period expires.
County staff project they can expend the money by the June deadline and have been quite active
with St. Louis Park Residents. The previous year long waiting list no longer exists, as the county
has added staff, three projects were completed in 2005 and another eight are in process. The
reallocation will provide funding to improve up to 4 more homes.
Next Steps
The following actions are required to receive 2006 CDBG funds:
February 21, 2006 Public hearing; passage of Resolution outlining proposed activities
February 23, 2006 Deadline of submission of CDBG Application to Hennepin County.
Attachment: Status Report: 2005 Housing Rehabilitation Activity, January 2006
Prepared By: Kathy Larsen, Housing Programs Coordinator
Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 1
6b. Public Hearing - Modification of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Finance
District Plan to include the Hoigaard Village Project.
This report considers a resolution adopting the Modification to the Redevelopment
Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and a Modification to the Tax Increment
Financing Plan for the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District to include
the proposed Hoigaard Village project site.
Recommended
Action:
Open / close Public Hearing.
Motion to approve the resolution adopting the Modification to
the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and a
Modification to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District.
Background
Union Land II, LLC (a development group led by Dunbar Development Corporation) has options
to purchase 9.6 acres of commercial/industrial property in the general vicinity of the Hoigaard’s
store located at 3550 State Hwy 100. More precisely, the subject site consists of six (6) parcels
between Xenwood Avenue on the West, Highway 100 on the East, West 36th Street on the South,
and the CP Railroad on the North. Union Land II is proposing to purchase these properties,
relocate existing businesses, remove the existing structures, remediate impacted soils, and
prepare the area for redevelopment. In their place, the developer plans to construct a two-phase,
four-stage, mixed use redevelopment called “Hoigaard Village”.
Phase One will include two stages and will be constructed along the north side of 36th Street
between Xenwood and Webster Avenues. Stage 1 will entail a five story, vertical mixed use
building facing 36th Street. The building will have approximately 25,000 square feet of
commercial space on the ground floor and a total of 74 condominium units on the upper four
floors.
Stage 2, to be built directly behind the mixed use building on the same block but along the south
side of 35 1/2 Street, will include 58 condominiums with below ground parking.
Phase Two will also include two stages and will be constructed on the properties currently
owned by Hoigaards. Stage 3, built along the north side of 35 1/2 Street between Xenwood and
Webster Avenues, will include 22 rowhouses with below ground parking.
Stage 4, to be built where the Hoigaards store is currently located, will include a 220-unit, luxury
apartment building. It will likely have 4 stories of housing above two stories of underground
parking.
Also incorporated into Phase Two will be a regional stormwater pond that will serve the northern
portion of the Elmwood neighborhood.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 2
All together, the proposed Hoigaard Village redevelopment project will include 374 housing
units.
Planning Approvals
The proposed redevelopment is subject to all planning and zoning requirements related to a
PUD. On September 19, 2005 the City Council approved a resolution that reguided and rezoned
the subject redevelopment site from Commercial and Industrial to Commercial Mixed Use and
High Density Residential. On November 21, 2005, the City Council approved the preliminary
plat, PUD, and street vacation request for the Hoigaard Village project. The developer’s
application for a final PUD and plat for Phase I of the project was approved by the City Council
at its February 6, 2006 meeting.
TIF District Approvals
The EDA/Council reviewed the preliminary TIF application from Union Land II LLC at the
January 10, 2005 study session. It received a project update on May 16, 2005. The developer’s
revised TIF application and general business points were discussed at the November 14, 2005
study session where they received no objection and staff was directed to negotiate a
redevelopment contract. At its January 3rd meeting, the Council set a public hearing date of
February 21 to consider the modification of the existing Elmwood TIF District to include the
Hoigaard Village project. On January 23rd, the EDA/Council discussed a list of more specific
business points that served as the basis for the proposed Redevelopment Contract.
On February 15th, the Planning Commission reviewed the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
Modification of the Elmwood Village TIF District and found that it was in conformance with the
city’s Comprehensive Plan.
Attached is a copy of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Modification of the Elmwood
Village Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1.
Staff and the EDA’s financial consultant, Ehlers & Associates, have reviewed numerous
proformas from Union Land II and concurred that the proposed Hoigaard Village redevelopment
project warrants the use of tax increment financing. More specifically, it was determined that
there is a financial gap in the proforma of approximately $5 million. This gap is attributable to
costs considered extraordinary to the proposed redevelopment. These include: building
demolition, soil remediation (associated with the city’s former incinerator and maintenance
facility), earthwork, replacement utilities, public infrastructure, and sub-regional stormwater
pond. It is for these costs that Union II is seeking public financing assistance. This level of
assistance would be considered reasonable given the complexity, quality, projected total value,
and other residual benefits derived from the proposed redevelopment.
The subject site is within the City’s Redevelopment Project Area. Staff is recommending that
the existing Elmwood Village TIF District (a Renewal and Renovation District created in 2004)
be modified to include the Hoigaard Village project instead of creating a new, separate district.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 3
Results of TIF Feasibility Analysis
Staff retained (at developer’s expense) LHB, Inc. to conduct a state-required inspection to
determine if the proposed project qualified as a Renewal and Renovation TIF District. The
inspection concluded that the proposed redevelopment area met both the “Coverage Test” and
the “Condition of Buildings Test” and thus qualified under Minnesota Statutes for tax increment
financing assistance.
Synopsis of the Proposed Modification to the Elmwood TIF District
The Modification to the Elmwood Village TIF District adds eight (8) parcels in the general
vicinity of Hoigaard’s to the existing Elmwood Village TIF District (please see attached map).
The two small commercial buildings located on the east side of Webster Ave and abutting
Hoigaards’ south parking lot (3525 Webster Ave S and 3536 State Hwy No 100 S.) are not
currently part of the proposed redevelopment but are included in the modified TIF District in the
event the developer acquires them and incorporates them into the project. It should also be noted
that neither the proposed Hoigaard Village project nor the modification to the Elmwood TIF
District include the property occupied by Burlington Coat Factory and Micro Center.
Classification of the District
The type of TIF district proposed for the subject project is a scattered site Renewal and
Renovation TIF District. The Elmwood Village TIF District is also a Renewal and Renovation
District. The proposed project meets statutory criteria for inclusion in a Renewal and
Renovation TIF District based on the following findings of fact:
• The District is a renewal and renovation district consisting of 10 parcels.
• An inventory shows that the parcels which are occupied (meaning that more than 15% of
the area of the parcel is occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking
lots, or other similar structures) constitute over 70% of the area of the District.
• An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 20 percent
of the buildings are structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act.
• An inspection of the buildings located within the District finds that more than 30 percent
of the buildings require substantial renovation or clearance to remove existing conditions
such as defined in the TIF Act.
Duration of the District
As authorized by statute, the duration of renewal and renovation districts is 15 years after receipt
of the first increment by the city (a total of 16 years of tax increment). The date of receipt of the
first full tax increment by the city will be 2007. Thus, it is estimated that the District would
terminate after 2022, or when the TIF plan is satisfied. The EDA or city has the right to
decertify the District prior to the legally required date.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 4
Fiscal Disparities Election
In keeping with the city’s TIF Policy, the modified District will contribute to fiscal disparities.
Recommendation
The proposed Modification of the Elmwood Village TIF Plan and accompanying resolution was
prepared by the EDA’s financial and legal consultants in consultation with staff. Staff
recommends approval of the attached resolution approving the Modification of the TIF Plan for
the Elmwood Village TIF District as presented.
Attachments: Resolution
TIF Plan
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 5
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 06-041
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND A MODIFICATION TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR THE ELMWOOD VILLAGE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the City of St. Louis Park (the "EDA") has heretofore established Redevelopment Project No. 1 and adopted a Redevelopment
Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the EDA and the City that the City adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification") and a Modification to the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan Modification") for the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing (the "District")
therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan Modification are referred to collectively herein as the ''Modifications"); all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act") all as reflected in the
Modifications, and presented for the Council's consideration. 1.02. The City has investigated the facts relating to the Modifications and has caused the Modifications to be prepared.
1.03. The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the adoption and approval of the proposed Modifications, including, but not limited to, notification of the County of Hennepin and Independent School District No. 283 having taxing jurisdiction
over the property included in the District, a review of and written comment on the Modifications by the City Planning Commission, and the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law.
1.04. The City is not modifying the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1. 1.05. The City is enlarging the boundaries of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment
Financing District. The District is being modified to be a scattered site renovation and renewal
district that includes 8 additional parcels to facilitate various public improvements associated with the construction of approximately 154 owner occupied units, 220 rental units and 25,000
sq/ft of retail space.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 6 Section 2. Findings for the Tax Increment Financing Plan Modification.
2.01. The Council hereby finds that the Modifications, are intended and, in the judgment of this Council, the effect of such actions will be, to provide an impetus for development in the public interest and accomplish certain objectives as specified in the
Modifications, which are hereby incorporated herein.
Section 3. Findings for the Modification of the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing
District.
3.01. The Council hereby finds that the District is a "scattered site renewal and
renovation district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 10a.
3.02. The Council further finds that the proposed development would not occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased
market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax
increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from
the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for
the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan, that the Modifications conform
to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the
Modifications will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a
whole, for the development or redevelopment of the District by private enterprise.
3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above
findings stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each
determination in writing, attached hereto as Exhibit A.
3.04. The City elects to calculate fiscal disparities for the District in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b, which means the fiscal disparities
contribution would be taken from inside the District.
Section 4. Public Purpose
4.01. The adoption of the Modifications conforms in all respects to the requirements of
the Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the State which is already built up. In addition, the plans and modification will facilitate the development of several sites that are occupied by obsolete industrial users with outside storage and environmental contamination issues and an underutilized site containing a retail facility. The re-use of the site will create 354
units of housing and 25,000 sq/ft of retail, which will improve the tax base and improve the general economy of the State, and thereby serves a public purpose. Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Modifications; Filing.
5.01. The Modifications are hereby approved, and shall be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk. Approval of the Modifications does not constitute approval of any project or a development agreement with any developer.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 7 5.02. The staff of the City is authorized to file the Modifications with the Commissioner of Revenue, the Office of the State Auditor and the County of Hennepin Auditor.
5.03. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Modifications and for this purpose to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further modifications,
resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21,
2006
_________________________________ ____________________________________
City Manager Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________ (Seal)
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 8
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 06-041
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Modification to the Tax
Increment Financing Plan for the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District, as
required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows:
1. Finding that the Elmwood Village Tax Increment Financing District is a scattered site
renewal and renovation district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10a.
The District consists of 8 parcels, with plans to redevelop the area for housing and
commercial purposes. The development will consist of approximately 154 owner occupied
units, 220 rental units and 25,000 sq/ft of retail space. More than 70 percent of the area in
the District is occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other
similar structures and more than 20 percent of the buildings in the District are structurally
substandard, and more than 30 percent are requiring substantial renovation or clearance.
(See Appendix F of the TIF Plan)
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not
reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably
foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be
expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase
in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the
present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the Elmwood
Village Tax Increment Financing District permitted by the TIF Plan.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to
occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: The
modified area being added to the District is occupied by substandard buildings and other
buildings that meet a lesser standard of obsolescence, all as further described in Appendix F.
The first phase requires acquisition, relocation of existing businesses, demolition of all the
existing structures, extensive environmental remediation and construction of 74 owner-
occupied housing units and 25,000 sq/ft of retail space by Dunbar Development. The City
has analyzed a proforma submitted by the developer, which, in the City's opinion,
demonstrates that development at the proposed density (which is consistent with the City's
Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study) would not be feasible without
the tax increment assistance provided under this plan.
The second and third phase of proposed development consists of approximately 58 and 22
units of owner-occupied housing respectively. The final phase proposed consists of the
development of 220 apartment units. Other needs in order to make such redevelopment
feasible, the developer will be required to build a storm water retention pond to address
water quality and run off issues from existing surrounding uses and need to undertake street
and roadway improvements. The City believes the if such public improvement costs were
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 9
assessed to the affected property, the assessments together with the other extraordinary costs
of demolition, relocation and environmental remediation would make redevelopment
extremely unlikely (based on the City's previous experience with similar situations).
The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without
the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated
to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected
tax increments for the maximum duration of the TIF District permitted by the TIF Plan:
While the property could be sold to another developer for some other use, these scenarios
are not feasible in the market due to various constraints. First, industrial uses could not
meet the market valuation due to the fact that they are single story in nature, lack the
amenities in design and construction and are traditionally valued at a market value
significantly lower than commercial uses. Second, the office market continues to be soft in
the Metropolitan Area and the ability to develop this entire site for office use is unlikely.
The City supported this finding on the grounds that any alternative redevelopment scenario
faces the same high costs of public improvements, acquisition of substandard and
incompatible buildings, relocation of existing business, environmental remediation and
demolition that add to the total development costs. Therefore, the City reasonably
determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on this site without
substantially similar assistance being provided to the development.
Therefore, the City concludes as follows:
a. The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District
will increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0.
b. If all development which is proposed to be assisted with tax increment were to
occur in the District, the total increase in market value would be up to
$129,524,810.
c. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration
of the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $11,280,841. (See
Appendix G in the TIF Plan)
d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur,
the Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market
value increase greater than $118,243,969 (the amount in clause b less the amount
in clause c) without tax increment assistance.
3. Finding that the Modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Elmwood Village
Tax Increment Financing District conforms to the general plan for the development or
redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 6b - Modification Of Elmwood TIF Dist
Page 10
The Planning Commission reviewed the Modification of the TIF Plan and found that the
Modification conforms to the general development plan of the City.
4. Finding that the Modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Elmwood Village
Tax Increment Financing District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the
sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Redevelopment
Project No. 1 by private enterprise.
The project to be assisted by the District will result in the redevelopment of contaminated
parcels, preserve and enhance the tax base and provide increased life-cycle housing
opportunities within the City.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 1
8a. Granite City Food and Brewery – Major Amendment to a Planned Unit
Development (Tower Place PUD)
Case No. 05-75-PUD
Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving a major amendment for
changes to the building footprint at 5500 Excelsior Blvd.
(Timberlodge Steakhouse, now known as Granite City Food and
Brewery), subject to conditions in the resolution.
Background:
Granite City Food and Brewery is currently planning to open a restaurant in the building
formerly occupied by the Timberlodge and Minnesota Steakhouses. Prior to opening for
business, Granite City plans to completely replace the existing façade and make modifications to
the building’s footprint. A minor amendment to the Tower Place Planned Unit Development
(PUD), to replace the building’s façade, was approved by the City Council on February 6, 2006.
The Tower Place PUD was originally approved in 1993 and has been amended on several
occasions since that time. The most recent amendment occurred in 2002, when Chipotle moved
into space previously occupied by Renewal-Windows by Anderson. At that time, the Planning
Commission expressed concern regarding the excessive massing of restaurants within the PUD.
The current proposal is not a conversion of space to or from a restaurant, but instead
modifications to an existing restaurant building.
Granite City’s current application is for an expansion to the building’s footprint. The west side
of the building would be expanded by removing a rounded corner and replacing it with a
traditional square building corner, which will allow the restaurant to add 200 square feet of
dining area. Another expansion to the east side of the building would provide space for a
brewery. The primary brewing processes would take place off-site, and the on-site tanks would
be used only for the final stage of the beer-production process.
Analysis:
Major Amendments
Major amendments to a PUD are required whenever changes affect certain zoning requirements
such as height, parking, density, or open space. In this case, Granite City’s proposal changes the
parking requirement for the existing restaurant building, so a major amendment is required.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 2
Parking Analysis
The Tower Place PUD has a total of 711 parking spaces available. Of those, 328 are provided on
site (to the south of the restaurant) and 383 are provided through a shared parking agreement
with Park Nicollet (immediately north of the restaurant). At the present time, the Timberlodge
Steakhouse has a parking requirement of 145 spaces. The building is easily accessible from the
north or south parking lots, but the primary entrance is to the south.
One portion of the proposed expansion to the building involves the creation of 200 square feet of
dining area, which results in a need for four new parking spaces. The other portion of the
expansion involves the creation of approximately 985 square feet of warehouse and storage
space. The warehouse/storage space will be used to house the brewery. The parking
requirement for this space results in the need for one new parking space. The existing parking is
able to accommodate the need for additional parking spaces.
In the future, if the warehouse/storage space were converted to dining area, the restaurant would
increase the need for parking by approximately 19 spaces. The existing parking would be able to
accommodate the need for these parking spaces. The joint parking agreement between the users
within the Tower Place PUD and Park Nicollet works well, because the users at Park Nicollet are
present primarily during the day and the users at the Tower Place PUD are present primarily
during the evening. During the last major amendment to the PUD (in August, 2002), a parking
study was completed which determined that at peak evening times there were approximately 200
available parking spaces. Because the uses within the Tower Place PUD have not changed since
that time, it is unlikely that peak demand for parking has increased.
Building Materials
The City Council approved a minor amendment to the Tower Place PUD on February 6, 2006 for
alterations to the building materials at Timberlodge Steakhouse. The building, which will be
converted to a Granite City Food and Brewery, was approved for building alterations which
included sufficient stone, brick and glass to meet the requirements of the Zoning Code.
The primary change to the building’s height will be the addition of an architectural parapet
element. Sheet A200 depicts this architectural element reaching to a maximum height of 22.5
feet. The color elevations that are attached refer to a ‘brewery and tower addition.’ The tower
addition in this case refers only to the parapet wall. The ‘tower’ reference is a misnomer, as no
elements of the building will reach higher than 22.5 feet.
As part of the exterior modifications, Granite City will also change the building’s signage.
Changes to the signs will require a separate sign permit.
Landscaping
The building expansion results in the need to replace some landscaping around the site.
Additionally, Granite City intends to install landscaping surrounding the building to better reflect
its chain of stores and to update the existing landscaping. The landscaping provided by Granite
City, shown in the attached landscaping plans, meets the requirement of the PUD.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 3
Off-site Impacts
No off-site impacts are expected as a result of the major amendment. The changes to the
building are minor and will not have a significant effect on the number of patrons handled by the
restaurant. As the use is not changing, few changes are expected in the peak business hours.
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission, on a vote of 6-0, recommended approval of the major amendment at
its February 15, 2006 meeting.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission and Staff recommend a motion to adopt a resolution approving a
major amendment to Tower Place PUD, subject to the conditions of the resolution.
Attachments: Location Map
Color Building Elevations
Site Plan and related documents
Prepared By: Adam Fulton, Associate Planner
Reviewed By: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 4
RESOLUTION NO. 06-042
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 06-025 APPROVED ON
FEBRUARY 6, 2006 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 14:6-7 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK
ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED “O”
OFFICE, C-2 COMMERCIAL AND R-C HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE DISTRICTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF
EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD AND HIGHWAY 100
Amends and Restates Resolution 06-025
Major amendment to complete structural alterations at 5500 Excelsior Blvd.
WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was
received on April 5, 1993 from the applicants, 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, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD Plan was published in the
St. Louis Park Sailor on May 5, 1993, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary PUD concept at the
meeting of May 5, 1993, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the meeting of May
17, 1993 and continued the hearing until June 2, 1993 and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary PUD
on a 6-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD at the meeting of
November 1, 1993, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD on a 6-
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,
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 93-183 approving the PUD was approved by the City
Council on November 15, 1993; and
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 5
WHEREAS, an application for an amendment for a PUD was received on July 26, 1994,
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits, and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 94-103 approving an amendment to the PUD was approved
by the City Council on August 1, 1994, and
WHEREAS, an application for an amendment for a PUD was received on November 22,
1994, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits, and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 94-180 approving an amendment to the PUD was approved
by the City Council on December 5, 1994, and
WHEREAS, on June 17, 2002, Frauenshuh Companies filed an application seeking a
major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow a change
in an approved use from a retail use to a restaurant use, and
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received
testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 6-1 recommended approval
of the major amendment to the PUD, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits, and
WHEREAS, on December 21, 2005, Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd. filed an
application seeking a minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower
Place to allow modifications to the exterior of the structure, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits,
WHEREAS, on December 21, 2005, Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd. filed an
application seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower
Place to allow structural alterations at 5500 Excelsior Blvd., and
WHEREAS, on February 15, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing,
received testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 6-0 recommended
approval of the major amendment to the PUD, and
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 6
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed
amendment including comments and exhibits,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park:
Recitals
The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein and made part of this resolution.
Findings
1. Frauenshuh Companies has made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit
Development under Section 14:6-7 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the “O”
Office, C-2 Commercial and R-C High Density Multiple Family Residence Districts
located at the northeast quadrant of Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 100 for the legal
description as follows, to-wit:
Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 93-18-PUD) and the effect of the proposed Final PUD and
amendments thereto on the health, safety, or general 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 provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The City Council has determined that approval of a Final PUD and the proposed
amendments thereto 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 determined that the proposed Final PUD and amendments
thereto are in harmony with the general provisions, purpose and intent of the City’s
Zoning Ordinance and its Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications
comply with the requirements of Section 14:6-7.2(E).
4. The contents of Planning Case File 93-18-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of
the public hearing and the record of decision for this case.
Conditions and Approval
A Final PUD at the location described in paragraph 1 of the above findings is approved based on
the recitals and findings set forth above, the Approved Final Plans, and subject to the following
conditions:
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 7
1. Approval of the roadway improvement plans submitted as part of the Indirect Source
Permit application by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Hennepin
County Department of Transportation.
2. Approval by the City and execution of a development agreement between the City and
Frauenshuh Companies which identifies responsibilities of each relating to the project.
3. Recording of the final plat of Tower Place by Hennepin County.
4. The Contract for Private Development between the Economic Development Authority
(EDA) and Frauenshuh Companies is incorporated herein by reference. City Council
intent is to implement both the Contract for Private Redevelopment and the development
agreement and give effect to all provisions of each, including but not limited to the
EDA’s right to review and approve Construction Plans as provided in Section 9.2 of said
Contract for Private Development.
5. The approval of this Final PUD applies only to those elements listed as Phase I
improvements on Exhibit A – Master Plan Phase I to be completed by Frauenshuh
Companies on Lots 6 and 7 and the right-of-way adjacent thereto up to the curb of the
adjacent road. This condition is subject to the limitation that the total square footage of
the retail and theater development shall not exceed the lesser of 47,200 square feet or the
square footage allocated to this development in the Indirect Source Permit as may be
amended from time to time.
6. The City reserves the right to require the applicant to install a pedestrian access from any
bus stop to be located on the north side of Excelsior Boulevard west of Park Nicollet
Boulevard to the development site.
7. Development of Lots 6-7 Tower Place and improvements on adjacent right-of-way up to
the curb of the adjacent road shall be in accordance with the following exhibits:
Exhibit A – Site Layout (Sheets C2.3)
(Amended by Condition No. 11 approved 8-19-02)
Exhibit B – Site Utilities (Sheets C3.3)
Exhibit C – Site Grading (Sheets C4.3)
Exhibit D – Site Planting (Sheet L2.3)
Exhibit E – Site Lighting (Sheet E1)
Exhibit F – Building Elevations (Sheets A2.00R, A.202R, A2.03R, A2.04R)
(Amended by Condition No. 11 approved 8-19-02)
The Site Layout (Exhibit A) is approved with the condition that vehicles leaving the site
from the driveway on Park Center Boulevard shall be prohibited from making left turns
to south bound Park Center Boulevard. The Development Agreement shall make
provision for on-going monitoring of the need for the left turn prohibition and removal of
the left turn prohibition if such monitoring indicates the prohibition is unnecessary.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 8
The Site Layout is based on the assumption the driveway on Excelsior Boulevard will
allow both ingress to and egress from the site. The Floor Plans on Exhibit F are
illustrative in nature and are subject to modification without amending this resolution.
(Amended by Condition No. 8 approved 8-1-94)
(Amended by Conditions 9 and 10 approved 12-5-94)
8. Condition number 7, Exhibit F is amended to delete Building Elevation Sheet A.202R
and replace it with Building Elevation Sheet A-2
(Amended by Condition No. 9 approved 12-5-94)
9. Condition number 8, Exhibit F is amended to delete Building Elevation Sheet A-2 and
replace it with Building Elevations Sheet A-11 dated November 10, 1994.
10. Condition number 7, Exhibits A through D, is amended by deleting sheets C2.3, C3.3,
C4.3 and L2.3 and replacing them with Sheets C2.1, C3.1, C4.1 and Planting Plan, all
dated November 16, 1994. These exhibits are modified by Exhibit G, McDonalds
Driveway Plan.
11. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 02-36-PUD) on August 19, 2002 to
incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow a change in 3,500 sq. ft. of tenant
space from retail to restaurant without intoxicating liquor (Chipotle) and add the
following conditions:
a. The site shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the official
exhibits (Exhibits A Site Layout and F Building Elevations shall be submitted), in
the form of an as-built survey with proposed changes shown and shall be revised
prior to signing the exhibits to meet the following conditions for the outdoor
seating area on the southwest corner of the theater/mixed use building:
1. The outdoor seating area must provide a 5 foot wide sidewalk that is kept
free of temporary and permanent obstruction. Such sidewalk must be 6
feet from and parallel to the building (or continue in a straight line from
the sidewalk to the east).
2. The outdoor seating area cannot be enclosed with a fence.
3. A maximum of two existing handicap parking stalls may be removed to
accommodate the outdoor seating area.
4. The size of outdoor seating area cannot be more than 10% of the indoor
restaurant area.
b. Official exhibits as revised per condition 11a. and updated to show as-built
conditions on the overall site must be signed by the applicant and owner prior to
issuance of a building permit. Such exhibits shall show the approved uses of this
development to include: 7,000 square feet as restaurant with intoxicating liquor,
3,400 sq. ft as restaurants without intoxicating liquor and/or food service,
retail/service, 3,800 sq. ft. as restaurant with in-vehicle sales/service, and in the
Theater/Mixed use building 26,000 sq. ft. for a theater, 900 sq. ft for
retail/service, and 5,900 sq. ft for retail or restaurant without intoxicating liquor.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8a - Granite City Major
Page 9
c. Required building, plumbing, electrical and other required permits shall be
obtained from the City. Such permits may impose additional conditions.
d. All required improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the new restaurant without intoxicating liquor, including:
1. Interior improvements in accordance with permit approval.
2. Compliance with Accessibility Code requirements.
3. Exterior exhaust chase must comply with the MN State Building Code.
e. Prior to installation of any new signs the applicant shall obtain sign permits.
f. The applicant is responsible for the installation of the on-site regulation signage as
recommended by SRF.
12. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 05-75-PUD) on February 6, 2006 to
incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow modifications to the exterior of the
building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions:
a. The exterior of the building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. shall be modified as shown
on Sheet A200 of the official exhibits.
b. Required permits for construction and installation of signs shall be obtained from
the City. Such permits may impose additional conditions.
c. Any modifications to the building footprint shall require a Major Amendment to
the Tower Place PUD.
13. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 05-76-CUP) on February 21, 2006 to
incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow structural alterations to the building at
5500 Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions:
a. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits.
b. No dining shall take place in the area planned for a brewery.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
022106 - 8b - Police Officer Labor Contract
Page 1
8b. Police Officer Union Contract: January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2006
A one year agreement between the City and the Police Officers Union for 2006.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor
Services (LELS) Local #206, establishing terms and conditions
of employment for one year, from 1/1/06 – 12/31/06.
Background
The City had two brief negotiation sessions with Patrol Officers prior to coming to this
agreement. Our officers are in line with our market and the increases recommended for 2006 are
the same given to non-union employees for wages and employer contribution. This will be our
fourth (of five open contracts) settlement for 2006.
Listed below is the summary of changes as negotiated:
• One year agreement
• 2006 wage increase of 3%, effective January 1, 2006
• 2006 increase in employer contribution for insurance, same as other non-exempt groups.
• Supplemental pay for officer assignments (Community Outreach, DARE, Drug Task
Force, School Liaison, and Support Services) will increase by $10 per month.
Comment: The entry level supplemental pay in 2005 was $140 per month and will
increase to $150/month in 2006, supplemental pay after 12 months was $160/month and
will increase to $170/month, and supplemental pay after 24 months was $180/month and
will increase to $190/month.
• Field Training Officer Pay: Remove the language, “up to a maximum of $350”, and
increase hourly supplemental pay to $3.00 per hour. Comment: Currently, officers
assigned to train new officers earn an hourly amount ($2.91/hr) of supplemental pay up to
a maximum of $350. By removing the maximum language, these officers will be
compensated fairly for each hour worked and won’t be penalized if they are needed to
work additional hours.
City staff is very pleased with this offer and recommends approval. Funds for this settlement are
in the 2006 budget. The proposed contract is on file with the City Clerk. More detail is available
upon request.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor Services Local #206, Police Officers,
establishing terms and conditions of employment for the duration of 1/1/06 – 12/31/06.
Attachment: Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Fosse, Human Resources Coordinator
Reviewed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
022106 - 8b - Police Officer Labor Contract
Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 06-043
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC., LOCAL #206
POLICE OFFICERS
JANUARY 1, 2006 – DECEMBER 31, 2006
WHEREAS, the City and the Union have reached a negotiated settlement covering the
terms and conditions of a Labor Agreement as permitted by the State of Minnesota Public
Employees Labor Relations Act, and
WHEREAS, the City Council may enter into such agreements as authorized by its
Charter;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute a Collective Bargaining
Agreement, City Contract #______ between the City of St. Louis Park and Law Enforcement
Labor Services, Inc. (LELS), Local #206, Police Officers, effective January 1, 2006 –
December 31, 2006.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8c - 49ers Labor Contract
Page 1
8c. International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local 49 Union Contract:
January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2007
A two year agreement between the City and the IUOE Union for 2006 and 2007.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and the International Union of
Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local #49, establishing terms and
conditions of employment for two years, from 1/1/06 –
12/31/07.
Background
We are pleased to bring to the Council another contract agreement between the City and Union
for 2006. Historically, our Local 49 Union has included classifications such as Maintenance
Level I, II, and III. Movement from M-I to M-II was based on time and successful performance.
Promotion from M-II to M-III was through application, interview, and selection. The majority of
our staff are at M-II.
Our position of Maintenance Level II has been falling behind the average of our market (Stanton
Group V cities metro suburbs greater than 25,000). After review of the market and our
operational and business needs, we redesigned the structure in 2007 to have one multifunctional
position titled Public Service Worker.
With the structure change, we were able to eliminate the majority of pay classifications for
“working out-of-class”. This was a natural change since the majority of all staff will now be in
the same classification of Public Service Worker.
Below are the details on the changes to this two year agreement:
• Two year agreement
• 2006 base wage increase of 3%, effective January 1, 2006
• 2006 increase in employer contribution for insurance to $660/month (additional
$55/month for employees who elect the high deductible plan with VEBA). Comment:
This is the same as our other non-exempt employees.
• 2006 increase in weekly on-call assignment pay from $220/week to $280/week.
Comment: Market adjustment for those on-call.
• 2007 eliminate M-I, II, and III classifications and replace with Public Service Worker,
four years to maximum wage level. Comment: Cost for this market adjustment is
$26,800 for the group over the general 3% for 2007.
• 2007 eliminate M-IV title and replace with Mechanic title.
• 2007 increase in employer contribution for insurance will be the same as other non-
exempt employees.
• 2006 add new article to allow the City to assign workers as “traffic” or “lead” workers
with supplemental pay. Employees assigned to work in traffic will receive $70 per
month, employees assigned as lead workers will receive $140 per month. Comment:
Assignment classification will be used in lieu of creating an additional position.
Assignment will be done by supervisors and based on business needs.
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8c - 49ers Labor Contract
Page 2
• Removal of many out-of-class pay articles which allowed M-II employees to earn M-III
pay while performing certain duties. Comment: With the new Public Service Worker
position, all employees will be paid based on years of service and successful job
performance instead of type of duties performed.
• Increase in amount of tool insurance provided by the City for Mechanics who are
required to provide their own tools, from $10,000 to $25,000.
City staff is pleased with this offer and recommends approval. Funds for this settlement are in
the 2006 budget. Budget impacts for 2007 will need to be taken into consideration at the time of
preparation of that budget. The proposed contract is on file with the City Clerk. More detail is
available upon request.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and the International Union of Operating Engineers Local #49,
establishing terms and conditions of employment for the duration of 1/1/06 – 12/31/07.
Attachment: Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Fosse, HR Coordinator
Reviewed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park Council Meeting
Item: 022106 - 8c - 49ers Labor Contract
Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 06-044
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
AND
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL #49
JANUARY 1, 2006 – DECEMBER 31, 2007
WHEREAS, the City and the Union have reached a negotiated settlement covering the
terms and conditions of a Labor Agreement as permitted by the State of Minnesota Public
Employees Labor Relations Act, and
WHEREAS, the City Council may enter into such agreements as authorized by its
Charter;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute a Collective Bargaining
Agreement, City Contract #____ between the City of St. Louis Park and the International Union
of Operating Engineers, Local #49, effective January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2007.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
022106 - 8d - Dispatcher Labor Contract
Page 1
8d. Public Safety Dispatcher Union Contract: January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2007
A two year agreement between the City and the Dispatchers Union for 2006 and 2007.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor
Services (LELS) Local #220, establishing terms and conditions
of employment for two years, from 1/1/06 – 12/31/07.
Background
We are pleased to bring to the Council another contract agreement between the City and Union
for 2006. There are several changes to the contract as detailed below. The majority of the
negotiation was centered on dispatch wages compared to market. When compared to our market
(average of Group V cities population of suburbs in the metro area 25,000 and higher), it was
found that our Dispatchers were falling below average. Over the years we have had difficulty in
recruitment in this area. As you know, dispatch is a very critical position and requires skilled
individuals who are not only good with general communications, they also need to multi-task
under pressure and deal with high stress situations. It is critical that our Dispatchers have parity
with market wages. The agreement between the City and the Union includes a market
adjustment in wages for 2007 to address this concern.
The agreement also includes the following terms:
• Two year agreement
• 2006 base wage increase of 3%, effective January 1, 2006
• 2006 increase in employer contribution for insurance to $660/month (additional
$55/month for employees who elect the high deductible plan with VEBA). Comment:
This is the same as our other non-exempt employees.
• 2007 base wage increase of 3%, effective January 1, 2007, plus a market adjustment of
$.45/hour. Comment: This is the adjustment to the wage to realign this group with the
market.
• Removal of bottom (first) step in salary progression. This allows Dispatchers to reach
the maximum salary level in five years instead of six years and also helps keep our
Dispatchers in line with market. Comment: This is to help with realignment with the
market and recruitment.
• 2007 increase in employer contribution for insurance will be the same as other non-
exempt employees.
• 2006 addition of article to allow the City to hire part-time Dispatchers. Comment: Both
union and management are interested in having this staffing option to help with schedules
in the future. We currently do not have any part-time dispatchers, and this would allow
us to hire part-time if needed. This is not an increase in staffing levels.
• 2006 increase in assignment pay for employees assigned to be Lead Dispatcher from
$2.90/hour to $4.00/hour. Comment: Mid-year 2005, we added a Letter of
Understanding to the contract which created a Lead Dispatcher assignment. After review
of the requirements of this position, it was determined that the pay for this assignment
should be increased to accurately compensate for the level of responsibility.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
022106 - 8d - Dispatcher Labor Contract
Page 2
City staff is pleased with this offer and recommends approval. Funds for this settlement are in
the 2006 budget. The proposed contract is on file with the City Clerk. More detail is available
upon request.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor
Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor Services Local #220, Public Safety
Dispatchers, establishing terms and conditions of employment for the duration of 1/1/06 –
12/31/07.
Attachment: Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Fosse, HR Coordinator
Reviewed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
022106 - 8d - Dispatcher Labor Contract
Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 06-045
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES, INC., LOCAL #220
PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS
JANUARY 1, 2006 – DECEMBER 31, 2007
WHEREAS, the City and the Union have reached a negotiated settlement covering the
terms and conditions of a Labor Agreement as permitted by the State of Minnesota Public
Employees Labor Relations Act, and
WHEREAS, the City Council may enter into such agreements as authorized by its
Charter;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute a Collective Bargaining
Agreement, City Contract #____ between the City of St. Louis Park and Law Enforcement Labor
Services, Inc. (LELS), Local #220, Public Safety Dispatchers, effective January 1, 2006 –
December 31, 2007.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 21, 2006
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk