Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019/03/11 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA MARCH 11, 2019 (Mayor Spano and Councilmember Harris out) 6:30 p.m. STUDY SESSION – Community room Discussion items 1. 6:30 p.m. Future study session agenda planning 2. 6:35 p.m. Body worn camera update 3. 7:20 p.m. Mixed-use zoning district amendments 4. 8:05 p.m. Sam’s Club land use and development study 5. 8:50 p.m. C-1 zoning district retail and service use restrictions 9:05 p.m. Communications/updates (verbal) 9:10 p.m. Adjourn Written reports 6. Outdoor parking lighting ordinance 7. Proposed use of donation to Westwood Hills Nature Center 8. Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the administration department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Meeting: Study session Meeting date: March 11, 2019 Discussion item: 1 Executive summary Title: Future study session agenda planning Recommended action: The city council and city manager to set the agenda for the special study session on March 18, 2019 and the regularly scheduled study session on March 25, 2019. Policy consideration: Not applicable. Summary: This report summarizes the proposed agenda for the special study session on March 18, 2019 and the regularly scheduled study session on March 25, 2019. Also attached to this report is: -study session discussion topics and timeline -Proposed topics for future study session discussion: o Election day public holiday - proposed by councilmember Miller o Resolution in support of an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) – proposed by councilmembers Rog, Mavity and Harris Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Tentative agenda – March 18 and March 25, 2019 Study session discussion topics and timeline Study session topics proposed for future study session discussion Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Reviewed by: Maria Carillo-Perez, Management Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Title: Future study session agenda planning March 18, 2019. 6 p.m. – Special study session – Community room 1.Council norms continued discussion w/ consultant Kay Adams – Admin. Services (90 minutes) Consultant Kay Adams will lead the discussion on council norms. This is a continued discussion from the council workshop held on January 10 and 11, 2019. March 25, 2019. 6:30 p.m. – Study session – Community room Tentative discussion items 1.Future study session agenda planning – Administrative services (5 minutes) 2.Outdoor parking lighting requirements – Community development (30 minutes) An ordinance was presented to the council on January 7, 2019 that established standards for electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) and revised lighting requirements for parking lots. The council approved the (EVSE) standards, but asked for further review of the parking lot lighting revisions. Staff consulted with the Illumination Engineering Society (IES) recommendations and determined only slight modifications are warranted in our code to provide lighting that is safe and has minimal impact on adjacent properties. Therefore, staff has reduced some of the light levels previously recommended in the draft ordinance, and are bringing these changes before council for discussion. 3.Affordable housing strategies – Community development (30 minutes) Staff will review several proposed housing strategies and tools that are being explored. 4.Crime/drug free rental ordinance work group appt. – Community development (45 minutes) Council will review applications received from individuals interested in serving on the crime/drug free rental ordinance workgroup and make appointments to the workgroup. 5.Market value overview – Administrative services (60 minutes) The property tax system and the 2019 assessment of market value are important for council to understand as they focus on overall governance of the community. This review will give council additional information on how the community’s real estate is reacting to the significant evolution of the housing stock, market demand trends for commercial- industrial space, and the current market cycle. Communications/meeting check-in – Administrative services (5 minutes) Time for communications between staff and council will be set aside on every study session agenda for the purposes of information sharing. Written reports 6.Historic Walker Lake Business District Loan Program 7.SWLRT update 8.February 2019 monthly financial report End of meeting: 9:25 p.m. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 1) Page 3 Title: Future study session agenda planning Study session discussion topics and timeline Discussion topic Comments Date Scheduled Retail/service/liquor stores size New title: C-1 zoning district retail and service use restrictions Discussed on 6/11/18; referred to PC. Discussed 11/26/18; Study session report 2/25/19 March 11, 2019 Finalize Council Norms Reviewed on 5/7/18; adoption postponed on 5/21/18. Discussed at Jan. Retreat March 18, 2019 Crime free ordinance/affordable housing strategies Discussed 5/14/18. 1st reading housing trust fund 10/1/18; Other affordable housing strategies/Crime Free Ordinance – Nov/Dec, 12/10 and 12/17/18 and 1/14/19 council discussion; Certain provisions of crime free ord. suspended; Work group being formed CFO work group to be discussed March 25, 2019 Zoning guidelines for transparency requirements Discussed 7/9/18. Referred to PC for review & recommendation. April 8, 2019 Community center project 60 min. discussion scheduled April 8, 2019 Firearm sales Discussed 5/21/18 & 7/23. Written report provided at 9/24 study session. PC currently reviewing ordinance options. Policy on city facilities adopted 10/15. Going to PC April 15 or May 6, 2019 Revitalization of Walker Lake area Part of preserving Walker building reports: 8/28/17, 9/25/17, 1/22/18, design study 2/12/18, update 4/23/18, design study update 8/27/18; SS report 2/11/19 May, 2019 Accessory dwelling units/home-based businesses June, 2019 Immigration & supporting families Discussed 8/6 and referred to HRC. HRC held comm. mtg. in Oct. Council/HRC discussion on 12/10; referred back to HRC for refinement of recommendations. May, 2019 Discuss and evaluate our public process TBD Easy access to nature, across city, starting with low-income neighborhoods TBD Utility pricing policy TBD Westwood Hills Nature Center Access Fund *On hold pending discussion with school district. *On hold STEP discussion: facilities Discussed on 1/14/19; *On hold until community center is discussed. *On hold SEED’s community greenhouse/resilient cities initiative *On hold until Food Access and Security study is complete and recommendations have been made.*On hold Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 1) Page 4 Title: Future study session agenda planning Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 1) Page 5 Title: Future study session agenda planning Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 1) Page 6 Title: Future study session agenda planning Subject: FW: Request to City of St Louis Park Council for: Resolution of Support for Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to MN Constitution On Mar 6, 2019, at 11:54 AM, Suzann W. wrote: City Council Members and Mayor, I have talked with you or left voice messages asking for your support as City of St. Louis Park (SLP) council members to support the equal rights amendment in the state of Minnesota Constitution. This amendment aligns with SLP’s goals for equity, inclusion and human rights. I have also talked with city staff to request this topic be on the next city council agenda and have had not heard back yet from my voicemail to Maria on that request. The resolution template is below and has been passed by other cities and local units of government including Minneapolis, St Paul, Robbinsdale, Ramsey County. The SLP League of Women Voters supports the ERA. Additional information and organization allies are on the ERA website https://www.eramn.org/ . Please contact Suzann Willhite to ask questions and communicate the next steps for approval by SLP City Council. We would like to have this resolution on the next March 18 meeting. Thank you, Resident Suzann W. Resolution in Support of an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) Whereas, the City of St Louis Park supports equal rights for the citizens of St Louis Park; and Whereas, the Minnesota Constitution does not explicitly guarantee that all rights that it protects are held equally by all citizens without regard to gender; and Whereas, bills have been introduced in both the House and Senate stating“equality under the law must not be abridged or denied on account of gender”. Whereas, women constitute over 50 percent of the citizenry and women play a critical role in families, the workplace, and in society as a whole, contributing to our economy and advancing our nation; and Whereas, women continue to confront a lack of political parity, workplace discrimination, health care inequities, disparate rates of poverty, sexual assault and domestic violence; and Whereas, the Equal Rights Amendment is required in order to provide gender-based equality in our courts and laws because the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the 14th Amendment does not apply specifically to issues of gender; and Whereas, although laws prohibiting gender discrimination exist, they can be repealed or reduced by a simple majority in the legislature; and Whereas, an Equal Rights Amendment would help correct systemic gender discrimination; and Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 1) Page 7 Title: Future study session agenda planning Whereas, Minnesota requested that Congress propose an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) in April of 1949 and then ratified the federal ERA in February of 1973 – yet still does not have sex or gender equality guaranteed in its own state constitution; and Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the City of St Louis Park calls on the Minnesota Senate and House to pass a bill for an act proposing an amendment to the Minnesota Constitution, known as the Equal Rights Amendment, providing for gender equality under the law. <era_city_resolution-St Louis Park.docx> Meeting: Study session Meeting date: March 11, 2019 Discussion item: 2 Executive summary Title: Body worn camera update Recommended action: No action necessary. The council directed that this report and discussion be scheduled. Policy consideration: Does the council have questions or concerns regarding the proposed revisions to the body worn camera policy? Summary: Council affirmed the police department body worn camera policy on September 4, 2018 and passed Resolution 18-134 directing the City Manager and Chief Harcey to report back to Council in six months regarding: 1. General reflections and learnings from the police department on the implementation and use of BWC’s 2. Criteria tracked to include, at a minimum, hours of utilization, officer compliance, how often reports are filed to document when cameras are not turned on, how often and under what circumstances officers review footage prior to writing reports, requests to view footage and police department response 3. Any police department proposed changes or updates to the use of BWC's policy 4. Other information that would be useful to the city council and the public to help understand and evaluate this initial trial and implementation. Chief Harcey will present information that corresponds to the information requested by Council in Resolution 18-134, based upon the use of the body worn cameras during the trial period. Financial or budget considerations: None at this time. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Body worn camera policy dated 01-08-19 Resolution 18-134 Prepared by: Mike Harcey, Police Chief Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: Body worn camera update Discussion Background: In February 2015 Council directed the police department to explore a body worn camera program. In November 2017, staff recommended to Council that our police department implement a body-worn camera program. At the council’s direction, policy development, evaluation and testing of body-worn camera hardware and software equipment began in January 2018. A public hearing on the body worn camera policy was held on August 20th, 2018. Council affirmed the body worn camera policy on September 4th, 2018 and passed Resolution number 18- 134 directing the City Manager and Chief Harcey to report back to Council in six months. The police department utilized BWC’s during a trial period conducted during September, October, November and December of 2018. Two vendors provided body worn cameras to test during our trial period. Six officers were trained on the equipment and our policy. The six officers worked 208 shifts combined during the trial period. The information provided in the following section is based upon the use of the body worn cameras during the trial period and corresponds to the information requested by Council in Resolution 18-134. 1. General reflections and learnings from the police department on the implementation and use of BWC’s. During the trial period police department staff noted the following reflections and learnings while utilizing the body worn cameras that will be critical to the program’s design and implementation: • Policy development – a comprehensive policy that supports the program’s three primary purposes; capturing evidence, assisting with report writing, and allowing for transparency and accountability in policing and protect the civil rights of the community. • Training – Building a complete knowledge base for officers and support staff alike in the areas of policy, equipment, and management of data. • Records management – This includes maintaining the storage application selected, building the evidence management systems, adhering to state and local audit requirements, meeting public data requests, and managing relationships with our external partners in the criminal justice field. 2. Criteria tracked to include, at a minimum, hours of utilization, officer compliance, how often reports are filed to document when cameras are not turned on, how often and under what circumstances officers review footage prior to writing reports, requests to view footage and police department response. During the trial period officers utilized the body worn cameras for 320 hours collecting 550 GB of data during 192 incidents that were recorded. Officers were in compliance with the activation of the cameras 92% of the time and completed the required report documenting when it was not turned on according to policy 16 times. Officers reviewed their video 38% of the time prior to completing their police reports. We have not received any public requests for video that was recorded during the trial period. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Title: Body worn camera update 3. Any police department proposed changes or updates to the use of BWC's policy. With the final vendor selection several minor updates were made to the policy to reflect the actual equipment and software terminology utilized by the vendor. Two other minor revisions were made to the policy to clarify work flow. The first revision defines the role of the Administrative Lieutenant or their designee to be responsible for non-employee requests for data. The second revision requires that an officer will report to their direct supervisor if they inaccurately categorize a video. The following changes have been highlighted in the attached updated policy. • Page 6 item B - All references to labeling changed to categorizing • Page 8 item E - Administrative lieutenant or their designee added • Page 10 item C - Added to provide guidance on documenting data access • Page 11 item I - Language reworked to clarify protocol for an inaccurately categorized file 4. Other information that would be useful to the city council and the public to help understand and evaluate this initial trial and implementation. During the trial period we were able to effectively evaluate the best product to fit our needs and test our policy in practice. The level of compliance by officers on the use of the cameras was at 92 % which we believe is a testament to the strength of the policy, product selection and the initial training provided to the officers prior to the trial period. Next steps: Delivery of the body worn cameras and squad dash cameras is scheduled for the last week of March. Training on the equipment and policy will take place during the first two weeks of April with full deployment of the equipment to be completed before the end of April 2019. 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 1 City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota Use of Body-Worn Camera’s Policy Purpose The primary purpose of using body-worn-cameras (BWCs) is to: A.Capture evidence arising from a police-citizen contact. B.Assist with accurate report writing. C.Allow for transparency and accountability in policing and protect the civil rights of the community. This policy sets forth guidelines governing the use of BWCs and administering the data that results. Compliance with these guidelines is mandatory, but it is recognized that officers must also attend to other primary duties and the safety of all concerned, sometimes in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving. Objectives The St. Louis Park Police Department has adopted the use of portable audio/video recorders to accomplish the following objectives: A.To enhance officer safety. B.To document statements and events during the course of an incident. C.To enhance the officers ability to document and review statements and actions for both internal reporting requirements and for courtroom preparation/presentation. D.To preserve audio and visual information for use in current and future investigations. E.To enhance the public trust by preserving factual representations of officer-citizen interactions in the form of audio-video recording. F.To promote the civility of police-civilian encounters G.To provide objective evidence to help resolve civilian complaints against police officers and the City of St. Louis Park. H.To protect the civil rights of the community. I.To assist with training and evaluation of officers. Policy It is the policy of this department to authorize and require the use of department-issued BWCs as set forth below, and to administer BWC data as provided by law. Scope This policy governs the use of BWCs in the course of official duties. It does not apply to the use of squad-based (dash-cam) recording systems. The Chief of Police or the chief’s designee may Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 4 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 2 supersede this policy by providing specific instructions for BWC use to individual officers, or providing specific instructions pertaining to particular events or classes of events, including but not limited to political rallies and demonstrations where their use might be perceived as a form of political or viewpoint-based surveillance. The chief or designee may also provide specific instructions or standard operating procedures for BWC use to officers assigned to specialized details, such as carrying out duties in courts or guarding prisoners or patients in hospitals and mental health facilities. In the event the chief does supersede policy by providing specific instructions for use, a written report will be submitted to the City Manager. Definitions The following phrases have special meanings as used in this policy: A.MGDPA or Data Practices Act refers to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. § 13.01, et seq. B.Records Retention Schedule refers to the General Records Retention Schedule for Minnesota Cities. C.Law enforcement-related information means information captured or available for capture by use of a BWC that has evidentiary value because it documents events with respect to a stop, arrest, search, citation, or charging decision. D.Evidentiary Value means that the information may be useful as proof in a prosecution or defense of a criminal action, related civil or administrative proceeding, further investigation of an actual or suspected criminal act, or in considering an allegation against a law enforcement agency or officer. E.General Citizen Contact means an informal encounter with a citizen that is not and does not become law enforcement-related or adversarial, and a recording of the event would not yield information relevant to an ongoing investigation. Examples include, but are not limited to, assisting a motorist with directions, summoning a wrecker, or receiving generalized concerns from a citizen about crime trends in his or her neighborhood. F.Adversarial means a law enforcement encounter with a person that becomes confrontational, during which at least one person expresses anger, resentment, or hostility toward the other, or at least one person directs toward the other verbal conduct consisting of arguing, threatening, challenging, swearing, yelling, or shouting. Encounters in which a citizen demands to be recorded or initiates recording on his or her own are deemed adversarial. G.Unintentionally recorded footage is a video recording that results from an officer’s inadvertence or neglect in operating the officer’s BWC, provided that no portion of the resulting recording has evidentiary value. Examples of unintentionally recorded footage include, but are not limited to, recordings made in station house locker rooms, restrooms, Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 5 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 3 and recordings made while officers were engaged in conversations of a non-business, personal nature with the expectation that the conversation was not being recorded. H.Official duties, for purposes of this policy, means that the officer is on duty and performing authorized law enforcement services on behalf of this agency. Training All users of a BWC will be trained on the cameras operation and this policy prior to deploying one. Use and Documentation A.Officers may use only department-issued BWCs in the performance of official duties for this agency or when otherwise performing authorized law enforcement services as an employee of this department. B.All officers working uniform patrol, uniform special details, traffic duties, and uniform school resource officer duties shall use a BWC unless permission has been granted by a supervisor to deviate from this clause. Plain clothes investigators/officers and administrators are allowed to use BWC when interacting with citizens, when appropriate. C.Officers who have deployed a BWC shall operate and use them consistent with this policy. Officers shall conduct a function test of their issued BWCs at the beginning of each shift to make sure the devices are operating properly. Officers noting a malfunction during testing or at any other time shall promptly report the malfunction to the officer’s supervisor and shall document the report in writing. As soon as is practical, the malfunctioning BWC shall be put down for service and the officer should deploy a working BWC. If a BWC malfunctions while recording, is lost, or damaged the circumstances shall be documented in a police report and a supervisor shall be notified. Supervisors shall take prompt action to address malfunctions and document the steps taken in writing. D.Officers should wear their BWC in a conspicuous manner at the location on their body and manner specified in training. E.Officers must document BWC use and non-use as follows: 1. Whenever an officer makes a recording, the existence of the recording shall be documented in the records management system, an incident report, or a citation if completed. 2. Whenever an officer fails to record an activity that is required to be recorded under this policy or captures only a part of the activity, the officer must document the circumstances and reasons for not recording in the records management system or incident report. Supervisors shall review these reports and initiate any corrective action deemed necessary. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 6 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 4 F.The department will maintain the following records and documents relating to BWC use, which are classified as public data: 1. The total number of BWCs owned or maintained by the agency; 2. A daily record of the total number of BWCs actually deployed and used by officers and, if applicable, the precincts in which they were used; 3. The total amount of recorded BWC data collected and maintained; and 4. This policy, together with the Records Retention Schedule. General Guidelines for Recording A.This policy is not intended to describe every possible situation in which the BWC should be activated, although there are many situations where use of the BWC is appropriate. Officers should activate the BWC any time the user believes it would be appropriate or valuable to record an incident. B.Officers shall activate their BWCs when anticipating that they will be involved in, become involved in, or witness other officers of this agency involved in a pursuit, Terry frisks, a traffic stop of a motorist, an investigative stop of a pedestrian, searches, seizures, arrests, response to resistance incidents, any encounter that becomes in any way hostile or confrontational (also known as) adversarial contact, and during other activities likely to yield information having evidentiary value. However, officers need not activate their cameras when it would be unsafe, impossible, or impractical to do so, but such instances of not recording when otherwise required must be documented as specified in the Use and Documentation guidelines, part (E)(2) (above). C.Officers have discretion to record or not record general citizen contacts. D.Officers will wear their camera in a conspicuous manner as specified in training. Officers have no affirmative duty to inform people that a BWC is being operated or that the individuals are being recorded. Officers may make an announcement that BWCs are being used. E.Once activated, the BWC should continue recording until the conclusion of the incident or encounter, or until it becomes apparent that additional recording is unlikely to capture information having evidentiary value. The supervisor having charge of a scene shall likewise direct the discontinuance of recording when further recording is unlikely to capture additional information having evidentiary value. If the recording is discontinued while an investigation, response, or incident is ongoing, officers shall state the reasons for ceasing the recording on camera before deactivating their BWC. If circumstances change, officers shall reactivate their cameras as required by this policy to capture information Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 7 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 5 having evidentiary value. Any decision to discontinue recording shall be made with respect to the seven policy objectives. F.Officers shall not intentionally block the BWC’s audio or visual recording functionality to defeat the purposes of this policy. This does not prevent an officer from temporarily blocking the visual recording while ensuring audio data is collected during an encounter with persons who are nude or when sensitive human areas are exposed. G.Notwithstanding any other provision in this policy, officers shall not use their BWCs or any other device to record other agency personnel during non-enforcement related activities, such as during pre- and post-shift time in locker rooms, during meal breaks, or during other private conversations, unless recording is authorized as part of a criminal investigation. Special Guidelines for Recording Officers may, in the exercise of sound discretion, determine: A.To use their BWCs to record any police-citizen encounter if there is reason to believe the recording would potentially yield information having evidentiary value, unless such recording is otherwise expressly prohibited. B.To use their BWCs to take recorded statements from persons believed to be victims of and witnesses to crimes, and persons suspected of committing crimes, considering the needs of the investigation and the circumstances pertaining to the victim, witness, or suspect. The preferred method of recording a formal statement from a victim, witness or suspect is using currently approved audio recording devices/software compatible with records management dictation software. In addition, C.Officers need not record persons being provided medical care unless there is reason to believe the recording would document information having evidentiary value. When responding to an apparent mental health crisis or event, BWCs shall be activated as necessary to document any response to resistance and the basis for it, and any other information having evidentiary value, but need not be activated when doing so would serve only to record symptoms or behaviors believed to be attributable to the mental health issue. D.Officers should use their BWC and/or squad-based audio/video systems to record their transportation and the physical transfer of persons in their custody to hospitals, detox and mental health care facilities, juvenile detention centers, and jails, but otherwise should not record in these facilities unless the officer anticipates witnessing a criminal event or being involved in or witnessing an adversarial encounter or response to resistance incident. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 8 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 6 School Resource Officers The St. Louis Park Police Department recognizes that the duties and working environment for School Resource Officers (SRO) are unique within policing. It recognizes the SROs are required to maintain school safety while keeping the sanctity of the learning environment that the school provides. SROs are expected to continuously build trusting relationships with students and staff. SROs often have impromptu interventions with students to deescalate arguments and/or conflicts. It is with this understanding that the St. Louis Park Police Department provide special guidelines for SROs and their BWC. The BWC should be activated in any of the following situations: (a) When summoned by any individual to respond to an incident where it is likely that law enforcement action will occur when you arrive. (b) Any self-initiated activity where it is previously known that you will make a custodial arrest. (c) Any self-initiated activity where it is previously known that you’re questioning / investigation will be used later in a criminal charge. (d) When feasible an SRO shall activate the BWC when the contact becomes adversarial or the subject exhibits unusual behaviors. Nothing in the policy undermines the fact that in many instances SROs are suddenly forced to take law enforcement action and have no opportunity to activate the BWC. It is also recognized that SROs have private (confidential) conversations with juveniles. It is not always appropriate to record these conversations as it diminishes the trust between the individual and the SRO. Downloading and Categorizing Data A.Each officer using a BWC is responsible for transferring or assuring the proper transfer of the data from their camera to the BWC server by the end of that officer’s shift. However, if the officer is involved in a shooting, in-custody death, or other law enforcement activity resulting in death or great bodily harm, a supervisor or investigator shall take custody of the officer’s BWC and consult with their supervisor. B.Officers shall categorize the BWC data files of each video capture and should consult with a supervisor if in doubt as to the appropriate category. The selected category(ies) shall determine the retention times per the general records retention schedule established by the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers Association (MCFOA). C.In addition, officers shall categorize each file appropriately, in the manner specified in training, with the appropriate category to indicate the information it contains. Some data subjects may have rights under the MGDPA limiting disclosure of information about them. These individuals include: 1. Victims and alleged victims of criminal sexual conduct and sex trafficking. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 9 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 7 2. Victims of child abuse or neglect. 3. Vulnerable adults who are victims of maltreatment. 4. Undercover officers. 5. Informants. 6. When the video is clearly offensive to common sensitivities. 7. Victims of and witnesses to crimes, if the victim or witness has requested not to be identified publicly. 8. Individuals who called 911, and services subscribers whose lines were used to place a call to the 911 system. 9. Mandated reporters. 10. Juvenile witnesses, if the nature of the event or activity justifies protecting the identity of the witness. 11. Juveniles who are or may be delinquent or engaged in criminal acts. 12. Individuals who make complaints about violations with respect to the use of real property. 13. Officers and employees who are the subject of a complaint related to the events captured on video. 14. Other individuals whose identities the officer believes may be legally protected from public disclosure. D.Category and flag designations may be corrected or amended based on additional information. Administering Access to BWC Data A.Data subjects. Under Minnesota law, the following are considered data subjects for purposes of administering access to BWC data: 1. Any person or entity whose image or voice is documented in the data. 2. The officer who collected the data. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 10 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 8 3. Any other officer whose voice or image is documented in the data, regardless of whether that officer is or can be identified by the recording. B.BWC data is presumptively private. BWC recordings are classified as private data about the data subjects unless there is a specific law that provides differently. As a result: 1. BWC data pertaining to people is presumed private, as is BWC data pertaining to businesses or other entities. 2. Some BWC data is classified as confidential (see C. below). 3. Some BWC data is classified as public (see D. below). C.Confidential data. BWC data that is collected or created as part of an active criminal investigation is confidential. This classification takes precedence over the “private” classification listed above and the “public” classifications listed below. D.Public data. The following BWC data is public: 1. Data documenting the discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty, other than for training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured, or dangerous. 2. Data that documents the use of force by a peace officer that results in substantial bodily harm. 3. Data that a data subject requests to be made accessible to the public, subject to redaction. Data on any data subject (other than a peace officer) who has not consented to the public release must be redacted [if practicable]. In addition, any data on undercover officers must be redacted. 4. Data that documents the final disposition of a disciplinary action against a public employee. However, if another provision of the Data Practices Act classifies data as private or otherwise not public, the data retains that other classification. For instance, data that reveals protected identities under Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17 (e.g., certain victims, witnesses, and others) should not be released even if it would otherwise fit into one of the public categories listed above. E.Access to BWC data by non-employees. Officers shall refer members of the media or public seeking access to BWC data to the administrative lieutenant or their designee, who shall process the request in accordance with the St. Louis Park Police Department’s applicable processes and policies and other governing laws. In particular: 1. An individual shall be allowed to review recorded BWC data about themself and other data subjects in the recording, but access shall not be granted: Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 11 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 9 a.If the data was collected or created as part of an active investigation. b. To portions of the data that the agency would otherwise be prohibited by law from disclosing to the person seeking access, such as portions that would reveal identities protected by Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17. 2. Unless the data is part of an active investigation, an individual data subject shall be provided with a copy of the recording upon request, but subject to the following guidelines on redaction: a.Data on other individuals in the recording who do not consent to the release must be redacted. b. Data that would identify undercover officers must be redacted. c.Data on other officers who are not undercover, and who are on duty and engaged in the performance of official duties, may not be redacted. F.Access by peace officers and law enforcement employees. No employee may have access to the department’s BWC data except for legitimate law enforcement or data administration purposes: 1. Officers may access and view stored BWC video only when there is a business need for doing so, including the need to defend against an allegation of misconduct or substandard performance. Officers may review video footage of an incident in which they were involved prior to preparing a report, giving a statement, or providing testimony about the incident. Officers shall not use the fact that a recording was made as a reason to write a less detailed report. 2. Supervisors may view recordings at any time they are making inquiry into an alleged complaint, performance issue, or policy violation. 3. Agency personnel are prohibited from accessing BWC data for non-business reasons and from sharing the data for non-law enforcement related purposes, including but not limited to uploading BWC data recorded or maintained by this agency to public and social media websites. All incidents of access to BWC data are digitally logged. Allegations of inappropriate access to BWC data will be investigated and based on the finding, discipline may result. 4. Employees seeking access to BWC data for non-business reasons may make a request for it in the same manner as any member of the public. G.Other authorized disclosures of data. Officers may display portions of BWC footage to witnesses as necessary for purposes of investigation as allowed by Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 15, as may be amended from time to time. These displays will generally be limited Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 12 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 10 in order to protect against the incidental disclosure of individuals whose identities are not public. Any displays will take place at the St. Louis Park Police Department with the approval of a supervisor. Protecting against incidental disclosure could involve, for instance, showing only a portion of the video, showing only screen shots, muting the audio, or playing the audio but not displaying video. In addition, 1. An officer may request a supervisor respond to the scene and request approval for a display to take place outside the St. Louis Park Police Department. 2. BWC data may be shared with other law enforcement agencies only for legitimate law enforcement purposes that are documented in writing at the time of the disclosure. 3. BWC data shall be made available to prosecutors, courts, and other criminal justice entities as provided by law. Data Security Safeguards A.Personally owned devices, including but not limited to computers and mobile devices, shall not be programmed or used to access or view agency BWC data. B.Officers shall not intentionally edit, alter, or erase any BWC recording unless otherwise expressly authorized by the Chief of Police or the Chief’s designee. C.As required by Minn. Stat. § 13.825, subd. 9, as may be amended from time to time, this agency shall obtain an independent biennial audit of its BWC program. Agency Use of Data A.To ensure compliance with this policy and to identify any performance areas in which additional training or guidance is required supervisors will review each officer’s BWC recordings during each officer’s trimester evaluation or more frequently if there is reason to do so. B.In addition, supervisors and other assigned personnel may access BWC data for the purposes of reviewing or investigating a specific incident that has given rise to a complaint or concern about officer misconduct or performance. C.When a video is accessed or reviewed via Evidence.com, a notation shall be entered into the “Notes” section of the screen stating the reason for access. D.Nothing in this policy limits or prohibits the use of BWC data as evidence of misconduct or as a basis for discipline. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 13 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 11 E.Officers should contact their supervisors to discuss retaining and using BWC footage for training purposes. Officer objections to preserving or using certain footage for training will be considered by the chief of Police on a case-by-case basis. Field training officers may utilize BWC data with trainees for the purpose of providing coaching and feedback on the trainees’ performance. Data Retention A.All BWC data shall be retained for a minimum period of 90 days. There are no exceptions for erroneously recorded or non-evidentiary data. B.Data documenting the discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty, other than for training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured, or dangerous, must be maintained for a minimum period of one year. C.Certain kinds of BWC data must be retained for six years: 1. Data that documents the use of deadly force by a peace officer, or force of a sufficient type or degree to require a response to resistance report or supervisory review. 2. Data documenting circumstances that have given rise to a formal complaint against an officer. D.Other data having evidentiary value shall be retained for the period specified in the Records Retention Schedule. When a particular recording is subject to multiple retention periods, it shall be maintained for the longest applicable period. E.Subject to Part F (below), all other BWC footage that is classified as non-evidentiary, becomes classified as non-evidentiary, or is not maintained for training shall be destroyed after 90 days. F.Upon written request by a BWC data subject, the agency shall retain a recording pertaining to that subject for an additional time period requested by the subject of up to 1 year. The agency will notify the requestor at the time of the request that the data will then be destroyed unless a new written request is received. G.The department shall maintain an inventory of BWC recordings having evidentiary value. H.The department will post this policy, together with a link to its Records Retention Schedule, on its website. I.In the event that a BWC data file is inaccurately categorized by an officer, or additional information is gained that suggests a data file category should be changed, the officer shall notify their immediate supervisor of the required change(s). Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 14 1/8/2019 Body-Worn Cameras Policy Page 12 Compliance Supervisors shall monitor for compliance with this policy. Depending on the circumstances, violations of the policy may result in coaching and counseling, oral reprimand, written reprimand, suspension or termination. The unauthorized access to or disclosure of BWC data may constitute misconduct and subject individuals to disciplinary action and criminal penalties pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13.09. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 15 Resolution No. 18-134 Resolution prescribing the reporting requirements of the city manager to the city council regarding the St. Louis Park police departments use of body worn cameras Whereas, on September 4, 2018 the city council affirmed the body worn camera (BWC) policy and directed staff to continue to move forward with the implementation of the BWC initiative; and Whereas, transparency and accountability regarding the police departments use of BWC’s is important in order to help maintain the public’s trust in the department; and Whereas, the city of St. Louis Park values continuous learning and improvement as it goes about providing services to the community. Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the city of St. Louis Park that in addition to the audit and reporting requirements required by state statute for an agencies use of BWC’s, the city manager, with the assistance of the police chief, is directed to provide a report to the city council within six months of the city council’s affirmation of the BWC policy and annually thereafter that includes, but is not limited to, the following: •General reflections and learnings from the police department on the implementation and use of BWC’s; •Criteria tracked to include, at a minimum, hours of utilization, officer compliance, how often reports are filed to document when cameras are not turned on, how often and under what circumstances officers review footage prior to writing reports, requests to view footage and police department response; •Any police department proposed changes or updates to the "Use of BWC's Policy”; •Other information that would be useful to the city council and the public to help understand and evaluate this initial trial and implementation.” Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 4, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 2) Title: Body worn camera update Page 16 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: March 11, 2019 Discussion item: 3 Executive summary Title: Mixed-use zoning district amendments Recommended action: Provide feedback to staff on the proposed amendments to the mixed- use zoning district. Policy consideration: Does city council support the proposed amendments to the mixed-use zoning district? Summary: Historically, properties in the city zoned M-X Mixed Use were required to apply for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow mixed-use buildings. In 2015, the City of St. Louis Park adopted a specific PUD zoning district, which essentially made the existing M-X District obsolete. On December 17, 2018 the city council approved the St. Louis Park 2040 comprehensive plan for submittal to the Metropolitan Council. It is expected that the Metropolitan Council will approve the plan in April 2019 and the plan will be placed into effect immediately following. The plan re-guides several properties on the city’s Future Land Use Map to mixed use (see attached). Therefore, the mixed-use zoning ordinance must be updated so it is consistent with the St. Louis Park 2040 land use plan. The city proposes amendments to the existing M-X District to provide a zoning district that creates a district-wide standard for mixed-use developments that are site and context sensitive, and will weave more mixed-use buildings into the fabric of St. Louis Park’s built environment. As of today, there are no undeveloped (or underdeveloped) parcels zoned for mixed-use, so the city will need to amend the zoning map to apply this new district to more properties. Since the fall of 2017, the planning commission has conducted multiple study sessions to discuss regulations within the MX district including building orientation, scale, height, build-to lines, building length, uses, density and density bonuses. These new provisions and recommendations will be presented by staff during city council’s study session. Financial or budget considerations: None Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion 2019 zoning map 2040 future land use map Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Karen Barton, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Title: Mixed-use zoning district amendments Discussion Background: Historically, properties zoned M-X Mixed Use were required to apply for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow mixed-use buildings. Some examples of development approved under the old mixed-use district include Excelsior & Grand, The Ellipse, Hoigaard Village, TowerLight, and Wayside House. In 2015, the City of St. Louis Park adopted a specific PUD zoning district, reducing the effectiveness and usefulness of the existing M-X District. Since 2015, fourteen developments have been rezoned to Planned Unit Development. Each of these developments required hours of negotiation to achieve the desired outcome, while many could have been approved and constructed under a mixed-use district that achieved the same results. The amended mixed-use district seeks to streamline this process, while meeting and exceeding the city’s goals and expectations. On December 17, 2018, the city council approved the St. Louis Park 2040 comprehensive plan for submittal to the Metropolitan Council. It is expected that the Metropolitan Council will approve the plan in April, 2019 and city will put the plan into effect immediately following. The plan re-guides several properties on the Future Land Use Map to mixed use. Therefore, it is necessary to update the mixed-use zoning ordinance so it is consistent with the land use plan. To achieve this, the city proposes amendments to the existing M-X District to provide a zoning district that allows a district-wide standard for mixed-use developments that are site and context sensitive, weaving more mixed-use buildings into the fabric of St. Louis Park’s built environment. Present considerations: The amended mixed-use district references other sections of the zoning code where possible, including but not limited to architectural and material standards, lighting, parking, ingress and egress, loading, and landscaping. New concepts proposed for the mixed-use district that are not used in other portions of the zoning ordinance are summarized as follows: Building orientation: Buildings are required to be oriented toward the primary and secondary streets. Orienting buildings toward streets places a higher priority on pedestrians and transit, than to parking that may be located to the side or rear of a building. Building height to street width ratio: The width of the adjoining street would be one measure by which the city regulates building height to help create a comfortable, pedestrian-friendly realm that is appropriate to the site and surrounding built environment. Building transitions: Building transition requirements are used to minimize crowding and shading of buildings, and to respond to surrounding land uses. Planning commission and staff recommend the mixed-use zoning district use the same setback and step back requirements as the existing Planning Unit Development zoning district. Build-to-line: A build-to-line establishes the minimum and maximum setbacks along these frontages to create a consistent street edge, which encourages pedestrian activity and helps create a sense of place. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 3) Page 3 Title: Mixed-use zoning district amendments Maximum building length: The mixed-use ordinance seeks to regulate maximum building length to increase pedestrian and vehicular access through sites, to decrease the scale and massing of buildings, and create a more connective mobility network for pedestrians, bicycles, and cars. Uses: The proposed mixed-use zoning district regulates which uses are allowed, and guides where uses can be placed within the building to ensure non-residential uses are located along the primary façade of the building. The district introduces a new use type, uses permitted in limited stories (PL), which specifically applies to residential and medical/dental uses, stating these uses shall be a minimum of 30 feet behind any primary façade or on stories above the first floor. This helps to establish a minimum depth of 30 feet along the primary façade for active, non-residential uses. Density bonuses: Today a mixed-use building with a maximum of 50 units per acre may be constructed in the C-2 general commercial zoning district with the approval of a conditional use permit. The mixed-use zoning district seeks to allow up to 75 units per acre to meet the goals of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan through the inclusion of density bonuses. The density bonus concept is used to help the city more predictably advance goals for inclusionary housing, climate action, sustainable buildings, and affordable commercial space. This approach could potentially reduce the need for lengthy negotiations to achieve these goals. Also, it would not hinge upon on city financial assistance alone to advance these goals. It is important to keep the density bonus list small to ensure the city is able to achieve desired goals and outcomes, and to provide choices to property owners to implement items most suitable to their sites, developments, and goals. Next steps: Provide feedback to planning commission and staff on the proposed concepts for the mixed-use zoning district. Based on city council’s feedback, the planning commission and staff will finalize their recommendations and hold a public hearing in the coming months for the new mixed-use zoning district. The ordinance will then be brought to city council for formal consideration. Properties Currently Zoned Mixed-use March 2019 0 0.5 10.25 MilesSource: Community Development 2019 Excelsior & Grand Wayside House The EllipseHoigaard Village TowerLight Right-of-way Legend MX Mixed Use Zoned Properties Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: Mixed-use zoning district amendments Page 4 Properties Reguided Mixed-use Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map 2040 0 0.5 10.25 MilesSource: Community Development 2019 2040 Reguide Commercial to Mixed Use 2040 Reguide Commercial to Mixed Use 2040 Reguide Commercial to Mixed Use Legend 2040 Mixed Use Guided Properties TexaTonka Shopping Center 2040 Reguide Commercial to Mixed Use Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: Mixed-use zoning district amendments Page 5 Meeting: City council Meeting date: March 11, 2019 Discussion item: 4 Executive summary Title: Sam’s Club land use and development study Recommended action: No formal action required. Provide staff feedback on alternative land use concepts suggested for further study as noted below and in the attached presentation. Policy consideration: Does the city council agree with the range of alternative land use scenarios recommended for further study? Summary: In August, 2018, the council adopted an interim ordinance establishing a moratorium on the use and development of the subject property, 3745 Louisiana Ave. S., also known as the former Sam’s Club site. The subject property had recently become available for sale, and as such triggered opportunities for re-use and/or redevelopment of the site that had not been contemplated as part of the city’s 2040 comprehensive plan update. It was therefore determined that a renewed study of the property was warranted to ensure the subject property would adequately address issues relating to the present use, future land use, and development or redevelopment of this vacant property. Specific concerns to be addressed included compatibility with existing surrounding uses, recent public improvements in the area, planned future land uses, proximity to the future light rail transit station, and the city’s strategic priorities. Staff and the consulting team have completed the initial background work including, site environmental assessment, market overview, and an opportunities/constraints analysis. Building off that information, the project team generated a series of land use alternatives for further consideration. These scenarios include the following: 1.Industrial re-use 2.Employment focused reuse with infill development 3.Multi-family residential redevelopment 4.Transit oriented mixed use The consulting team will present these scenarios along with background as to how they were derived. Next Steps: Prepare site sketches and fit plans for each scenario, considering circulation, parking, and green space. Further define environmental remediation required and generate a list of pros and cons for each scenario. Identify implementation steps needed such as changes to land use and zoning, capital improvement needs, and other considerations. Financial or budget considerations: None at this time. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion Summary matrix of the market assessment Recommended scenarios Scenario outlooks Prepared by: Brad Scheib, HKGi and Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 4) Page 2 Title: Sam’s Club land use and development study Discussion Background: Retail operations at the Sam’s Club store on the subject property ceased in January, 2018. Previous planning efforts within the area had not considered a change in land use for the property, as the building was relatively new and no indication was given that the store would be closing. The closure of the store provided an opportunity to review the city’s official comprehensive plan future land use map and zoning ordinance provisions for the now vacant property. In August 2018, the city council adopted Ordinance No. 2542-18: An interim ordinance establishing a moratorium on the use and development of the building and lands located at 3745 Louisiana Avenue South, which went into effect September 14, 2018 and is set to expire on September 14, 2019. The moratorium allows the city time to study and analyze future land uses and implement any official city controls needed. The study has explored the existing conditions and previous planning efforts, assessed the opportunities and constraints, and researched environmental and market considerations. Existing conditions: •13.5 Acre Site –On Louisiana Avenue –South of Highway 7 –North of regional trail/railroad •Former Sam’s Club site –150,000 sq. ft. store –Auto-fueling station in southeast corner of site –Approximately 600 parking spaces •Neighboring Uses: –North: Stormwater & pump house –East: Highway 7 Corporate Center –South: Cedar Lake Trail –West: Cardinal Glass & U-Haul Self-Storage Previous planning efforts: •Transitional Station Area Action Plan (TSAAP) –Louisiana Station (2013) •Louisiana Avenue Station Framework + Design Guidelines (2014) •Draft Form-Based Code (2015) •2040 Comprehensive Plan Update (2019) Previous planning efforts focused on the area as an employment center. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan did not re-guide the subject property, because the city wanted this study to help inform the land use decision. Opportunities/Constraints Analysis: The consulting team assessed the opportunities and constraints of the subject property. Opportunities include the location/proximity to the future light rail transit station, regional trail, and access to regional highways within the 694/494 loop. The site has elevated views from Highway 7 and the regional trail. The area is prime for redevelopment. Recent investments in Highway 7 & Louisiana Avenue have improved Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 4) Page 3 Title: Sam’s Club land use and development study accessibility and aesthetics. The area currently serves as an employment area that includes industrial and business park uses and Methodist Hospital. Constraints include the location/proximity of the electrical substation, noise from Highway 7 and the railroad, barriers to nearby public parks/open space, challenging bicycle/pedestrian environment, lack of walkable amenities, significant environmental constraints, and the surrounding development pattern. Market considerations: The consulting team conducted a number of interviews with development firms to assess the market conditions. The site was recently listed for $12,500,000. There are two general scenarios for potential buyers: redevelopment or re-use of the building. A matrix summarizing the consulting team’s assessment of the current market for potential future land uses is attached for your review. Additional details will be presented at the meeting. Present considerations: Staff and the consulting team recommend advancing four land use scenarios for further study. These are summarized in the attached exhibit and include industrial re-use, employment-focused re-use with infill, multi-family residential development, and transit oriented mixed use redevelopment. Next steps: The project team will analyze the scenarios based on city council discussion. The analysis will include the form and layout of each scenario, taking into account parking, vehicle access/circulation, pedestrian and bicycle connections/facilities, green space and open space, and relationship to surrounding properties. The analysis will also look at the expected environmental remediation impact of each scenario, as well as the complexity of implementation and official controls needed regarding land use and zoning. The full analysis of these scenarios is tentatively scheduled to be presented to the city council at the May 13, 2019, study session. From there, staff and the project team will work on a direction for implementing official controls regarding land use and zoning for the subject property, with the intention of having official controls adopted and effective by September 14, 2019, when the moratorium ends. Current Market Likelihood of Future Uses Light Industry Office Commercial / Retail Multi-Family Apartments / Condos Mixed Use: 1/3 residential, 1/3 commercial, 1/3 office Mixed Use: 75% residential, 20% office, 5% commercial Re-Use of Building (w/ possible minor infill) Very Likely Possible – only “class C” offices Possible – repositioned as multi-tenant retail, with deed restrictions Not Likely Not Likely Not Likely Redevelopment of Site (demolition + new construction) Not Likely Not Likely for whole site Not Likely – due to costs and deed restrictions Very Likely Not Likely – too much office and commercial Very Likely Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 4) Title: Sam’s Club land use and development study Page 4 Scenario 1 Industrial Re-Use •Light industrial re-use of existing building •Possible recirculation of site/more loading docks added •Up to 20,000 SF of additional related office/flex Scenario 2 Employment-Focused Re- Use with Infill •Light industrial re-use of existing building •Office - up to 80,000 sf of infill •Retail - up to 20,000 sf of infill •Hotel (100 rooms) •Structured parking Scenario 3 Multi-Family Residential Redevelopment •600-700 Units (50-60 du/ac) •Up to 6 story buildings •Likely a mix of Market, Senior, Affordable •Minor Retail – up to 5,000 SF •Restaurant, Cafe, Convenience, etc Scenario 4 Transit Oriented Mixed Use •75% Residential: 475- 600 Units (50-60 du/ac) •Up to 6 story buildings •Likely a mix of Market, Senior, Affordable •20% Office: Up to 80,000 SF •Phased •Traditional or Medical Focused •5% Commercial: 10,000-15,000 SF Retail Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 4) Title: Sam’s Club land use and development study Page 5 Scenario Outlooks Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Market Feasibility Today High Low High Mid Time to Complete Low High Mid Mid Level of Public Assistance Low Mid Mid Mid Additional Jobs Mid High Low Mid Additional Housing Low Low High High Complexity Low Mid Mid High Level of Impact Low Mid Mid High Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 4) Title: Sam’s Club land use and development study Page 6 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: March 11, 2019 Written report: 5 Executive summary Title: C-1 zoning district retail and service use restrictions Recommended action: The purpose of this report is to update the council on planning commission recommendations and clarify the changes that occurred since the city council last discussed this item. Staff desires direction on whether this topic should be brought back for another study session discussion or proceed with the formal public hearing process for an ordinance. Policy consideration: Does the council support the planning commission recommendations? Summary: At the direction of the council, the planning commission reviewed size limitations for retail, service and off-sale liquor stores located in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. The planning commission discussed the question and reviewed options at three study session meetings. Attached is a discussion of how the planning commission recommendation compares to previous council discussions. Next Step: Based on council discussion staff will either schedule this item for a future study session, or staff will proceed with a public hearing for the proposed ordinance amending the C- 1 Neighborhood Commercial district as recommended by the planning commission. Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion Summary of proposed amendment Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Karen Barton, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 5) Page 2 Title: C-1 zoning district retail and service use restrictions Discussion Council recommendation: The council last discussed this topic at the November 26, 2018 study session. At that meeting, staff presented an option that would amend the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial district by adjusting what can be approved administratively according to the Intensity Class Measures table, which is included below. In summary the adjustment would result in the following changes: 1.Making retail and shopping center uses an administrative approval up to class 3 instead of class 4 as allowed by the current code. This reduces the size of business that can be approved administratively from 20,000 square feet to 10,000 square feet. 2.Limit retail and shopping center uses that can be approved by conditional use permit (CUP) to class 4. This means that class 5 and above is not available in the C-1 district, and that the maximum size business allowed would be limited to 20,000 square feet. The council discussed options for limiting the size of retail and services uses, which included an option as low as 5,000 square feet. The council also questioned how limiting the building size would impact housing options. After discussing the topic, the council agreed to refer the matter to the planning commission for consideration. TABLE 36-115C Intensity Class Measures Maxi- mum Density Factor (DU / Acre) Maxi- mum Impervi ous Surface Ratio Maxi- mum Floor Area Ratio Maxi- Mum Height (in feet) Maxi- mum Trips/ AC./Day Gross Building Area Hours of Operation Resultant Land Use Intensity Class Residential uses 9 -- -- 30 100 2,000 Class 1 All other uses -- 0.30 0.15 30 100 2,000 6:00 a.m./ 6:00 p.m. Residential uses 15 -- -- 35 300 5,000 -- Class 2 All uses -- 0.40 0.25 35 300 5,000 6:00 a.m./ 10:00 p.m. All uses 20 0.60 0.50 40 650 10,000 6:00 a.m/ 12:00 p.m. Class 3 All uses 30 0.70 0.80 50 1,000 20,000 6:00 a.m./ 12:00 p.m. Class 4 All uses 40 0.80 1.00 75 1,500 50,000 24 hours Class 5 All uses 50 0.90 1.40 150 2,500 100,000 24 hours Class 6 All uses 50+ 0.90+ 1.40+ 150+ 2,500+ 100,000+ Class 7 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 5) Page 3 Title: C-1 zoning district retail and service use restrictions Planning commission recommendation: The planning commission expressed the opinion that the existing regulations were sufficient for development in the C-1 district. However, based on the city council’s request and over the course of three study sessions, they discussed what adjustments to building and use sizes and they may be able to support. They decided the following: 1.The threshold for allowing a business to seek administrative approval should not be lowered from class 4 to class 3. Lowering the threshold for administrative approval from class 4 to class 3 was viewed as a burden to the small business owner. While they agree that a CUP should be used to gather public input for projects that have potential impact on adjacent properties, they were fully supported allowing up to class 4 administratively, similar to the current regulations. To address some of the city councilmembers’ concerns about business size, the planning commission recommended limiting only retail and services uses to 7,500 square feet administratively instead of the 20,000 square feet allowed by class 4. While this is more than the 5,000 square foot limit raised during the council discussion, it is a significant reduction from the 20,000 square feet currently allowed by code. The 7,500 square feet maximum was decided in part by correlations to building code requirements that come into play for businesses that exceed floor areas approximating 7,500 square feet. 2.The planning commission recommendation does not limit all uses to class 4 by CUP as presented to the council. Instead, they recommend keeping the existing format that allows most uses class 5 and above by conditional use permit. The planning commission, however, recommends limiting retail and services uses to a maximum of 20,000 square feet with a CUP. 3.In order to remove a potential barrier to administratively allowing up to eight housing units in a mixed-use building, planning commission recommends exempting the residential portions of a building from the gross floor area restrictions in the Intensity Class Measure table. All buildings, including housing, would still be limited by the height, floor area ratio and other dimensional requirements in the C-1 district. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 5) Page 4 Title: C-1 zoning district retail and service use restrictions Summary of proposed amendment: Sec. 36-193. C-1 neighborhood commercial district. (a) Purpose/effect. The purpose of this C-1 neighborhood commercial district is to provide for low-intensity, service-oriented commercial uses for surrounding residential neighborhoods. Limits will be placed on the type, size, and intensity of commercial uses in this district to ensure and protect compatibility with adjacent residential areas. *** (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in a C-1 district may be used for one or more of the following uses. *** (11)Service. The maximum floor area shall be 2,500 7,500 square feet. *** (15)Residential/multifamily/cluster housing. The conditions are as follows: a.It is part of a commercial development permitted within the district. b.The building design and placement provide a desirable residential environment. c.Access to open space, plazas, and pedestrian ways is provided. d.The housing is located above the ground floor. e.The minimum spacing between buildings is at least equal to the average heights of the buildings except where dwellings share common walls. f.The total number of units provided on an individual parcel does not exceed eight units. g.Residential uses located above the first floor shall not be included in the Gross Building Area limits established in the intensity classification table (Table 36- 115C). *** (25)Retail. The conditions for retail are that the maximum floor area shall be 7,500 square feet and shall not is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 for all other measures. (26)Large item retail. The conditions for large item retail are that the maximum floor area shall be 7,500 square feet and shall not is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4. (d)Uses permitted by conditional use permit. No structure or land in a C-1 district shall be used for the following uses except by conditional use permit. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 5) Page 5 Title: C-1 zoning district retail and service use restrictions *** (2) Exceeding classification 4. All of those uses which are permitted or permitted with conditions, which exceed an intensity classification 4, shall be conditional uses. The conditions are as follows: a. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. b. Buildings shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential or has an occupied institutional building including but not limited to a school, religious institution or community center. c. The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of the redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood in which it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying this requirement. d. The cumulative gross floor area used for retail, large item retail, and service uses shall not exceed 20,000 square feet. (3) More than one principal building. All uses where more than one principal building is located on the same lot. (4) Residential/multifamily/cluster housing. The conditions are as follows: a. It is part of a larger commercial development permitted within the district. b. The building design and placement provide a desirable residential environment. c. Access to off-site parks, open space, plazas and pedestrian ways is provided. d. The housing is located above the ground floor. e. The minimum spacing between buildings is at least equal to the average heights of the buildings except where dwellings share common walls. f. The total number of units provided on an individual parcel does not exceed a density of 30 units per acre. g. The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of the redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood in which it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying this requirement. h. A minimum of 12% of the site area is developed as designed outdoor recreation area. Meeting: Study session Meeting date: March 11, 2019 Written report: 6 Executive summary Title: Outdoor parking lighting ordinance Recommended action: No formal action at this time. Please review staff’s summary of the ordinance and provide questions or comments to staff before the study session discussion on March 25, 2019. Policy consideration: Do the latest proposed changes to the lighting requirements for outdoor parking lots address city council’s concerns? Summary: An ordinance was presented to the council on January 7, 2019 that established standards for electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) and revised lighting requirements for parking lots. The council approved the EVSE standards, but tabled the parking lot lighting revisions. Staff reviewed the Illumination Engineering Society (IES) recommendations and determined that less significant modifications to the current regulations could be supported and still provide lighting that is both safe and has minimal impact on adjacent properties. Therefore, staff has reduced some of the light levels recommended in the previous draft ordinance. The changes are summarized in the attached discussion. The purpose of the proposed changes is to provide safe, secure and effective lighting for users of parking lots in the city. The changes reconcile conflicting provisions in the current ordinance. Also, the changes allow for more lighting during business hours to address the needs of older customers, require lighting to be reduced after business hours, and continue to mitigate impacts to neighboring properties. Financial or budget considerations: No considerations. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Discussion Table comparing the changes to the lighting ordinance Definition of key terms Recommended site visits Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 6) Page 2 Title: Outdoor parking lighting ordinance Discussion Background: The zoning ordinance specifies lighting standards for parking lots and structures to ensure safe lighting levels for users of all ages while reducing or eliminating spillover lighting onto nearby properties. These standards are reinforced by studies conducted by the IES. Below is a summary of the changes. There is also a table that compares the various proposals that have been shown to city council. Also, staff provided definitions to some key terms that are used in the summary at the end of the report. Summary of issues and proposed changes. Staff reviewed the council comments received at the January 7, 2019 meeting, and revisited the IES standards. Staff made adjustments to the proposed ordinance to better address the concerns expressed by the council, and are still consistent with IES recommendations. A summary of the revisions follows: 1.Adjacent to residential. City code requires a maximum of 0.5 footcandles at the property line adjacent to residential. No changes are proposed. The city’s existing regulations have been effective to address community concerns. 2.Adjacent to non-residential. City code requires a maximum of 1.0 footcandles at the property line adjacent to non-residential properties, including right-of-ways. No changes are proposed. The city’s existing regulations have been effective to address community concerns. 3.Maximum average allowed. City code has conflicting regulations. Section 6-361(k)(8) which regulates parking lots requires between 0.4 and 1.0 footcandles. Section 36-363(d)(2), which regulates lighting, requires the IES recommended light levels. The staff recommendation is to resolve this conflict by using the lowest IES recommendation, which is 3.0 footcandles for persons of all ages. This light level acknowledges that some people need more light than others, and specifically people need more light as they age. 4.Minimum/maximum levels. The previous ordinance adds minimum and maximum light levels as reflected from asphalt and concrete surfaces. This is not in the current code, and it is an alternative method of measuring light, making it redundant. Therefore, staff is removing it from the revised ordinance. 5.After hours. The previous draft ordinance added maximum light levels after business hours, which does not exist in the current code. Staff reviewed the maximum light levels, and lowered them to minimum levels recommended by IES for maintaining safe levels. 6.Parking structures. Staff revised the structured parking lighting to differentiate between fully enclosed and open to the sides. Fully enclosed is proposed to stay at a maximum of 5.0 footcandles. Partially enclosed was reduced to 3.0 footcandles, which is consistent with parking lots. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 6) Page 3 Title: Outdoor parking lighting ordinance Site Visit: Attached to the report is an aerial photo of Miracle Mile. The photo indicates where light readings were taken by staff after new LED lights were installed in 2018. The photo can be used by members of the council that wish to visit the site and see what the light reading looks like at specific locations at miracle mile. The highest readings were taken directly under lights. The lowest light readings adjacent to residential were taken in the grassy area between the lights and the fence. The photograph also shows the difference in lighting between the customer parking lot/store front of the mall located along Excelsior Blvd, and the lower light levels behind the mall adjacent to residential. While the city requires a maximum average light level across the entire parking lot, it is common practice to balance light levels across the entirety of the parking lot by providing more light to high traffic areas for safety and to create an inviting environment for customers and utilizing lower light levels in low traffic areas and areas adjacent to residential. The Shoppes at Knollwood aerial shows light readings taken at four locations. The lights to the west of Chick-fil-A are LEDs that were installed in 2018. All other lights are old, non LED fixtures. The Shoppes at Knollwood is interested in replacing the older lights with LEDs, but is concerned about lowering light levels below 2.0 footcandles average due to the variety of customers and employees visiting the site. The few light readings indicate that the conversion to LED could result in an average between 2.5 and 3.0 footcandles across the parking lot which meets IES recommendations and the revised ordinance. Next steps: This item will be discussed at the March 25 city council meeting. If, after that discussion, the revisions are acceptable to the council, then staff will prepare an ordinance to be brought back to the council for approval of the first reading. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 6) Page 4 Title: Outdoor parking lighting ordinance Table comparing changes to the lighting ordinance. Parking Lot: Existing Code Previous Proposal Revised Proposal Maximum light levels at property line adjacent to residential 0.5 fc No change No change Maximum light levels at property line adjacent to non- residential and right- of-way. 1.0 fc No change No change Maximum average light level allowed. 1.0 fc and as recommended by IES* 5 fc 3 fc which is consistent with IES Maximum light levels in parking lot. Does not address. 7 fc on asphalt 14 fc on concrete Removed from proposed ordinance. Minimum light levels in parking lot. Does not address 0.5 fc on asphalt 1.0 fc on concrete Removed from proposed ordinance. Light levels after business hours. Does not address Maximum average between 0.2 and 2.8 fc. Maximum average of 1.0 fc which is consistent with IES. Structured parking: Existing Code Previous Proposal Revised Proposal Maximum average. 1.0 fc 5.0 fc 5.0 fc fully enclosed. 3.0 fc covered, but open sides. Top deck Does not address. Treat as parking lot No change. Motion detectors Does not address. Lighting shall be between 0.2 and 2.8 fc when no motion detected. Lighting shall not exceed 1.0 fc when no motion detected. Light level at entrance/exit Does not address 1.0 to 14.0 fc 5.0 fc for all structures. * The current code has conflicting regulations. The parking section of the code states a maximum average of 1.0 fc. The lighting section of the code requires lighting not to exceed the IES recommendations, which is 3.0 fc for persons of all ages. fc = Footcandles Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 6) Page 5 Title: Outdoor parking lighting ordinance Definitions to key terms Below are some key terms in the ordinance and IES recommendations as they relate to the parking lot lighting discussion. Parking structures include underground and above ground parking structures where the parking surface is not open to the sky. Parking lots include any parking surface that is open to the sky, such as a typical parking lot constructed on the ground and the upper level of a parking ramp when it is open to the sky. Footcandles. The basic unit of illuminance or the amount of light falling on a surface. One footcandle is approximately equal to the illuminance produced by a light source of one candle in intensity, measured on a surface at a distance of one foot above grade. Footcandles can be measured both horizontally and vertically by a footcandle or light meter. Light Spill. Light that falls beyond the boundaries of the property on which the lighting installation is located and because of quantitative, directional or spectral content cause’s annoyance, discomfort, or loss in visual performance and visibility. Glare. The sensation produced directly by a light source or indirectly from reflective surfaces within the visual field that is sufficiently brighter than the level to which the eyes are adapted, which can cause annoyance, discomfort, or loss in visual performance and visibility. The magnitude of glare depends on such factors as the size, position, brightness of the source, and on the brightness level to which the eyes are adapted. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 6) Page 6 Title: Outdoor parking lighting ordinance Miracle Mile Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 6) Page 7 Title: Outdoor parking lighting ordinance Shoppes at Knollwood Meeting: City council Meeting date: March 11, 2019 Written report: 7 Executive summary Title: Proposed use of donation to Westwood Hills Nature Center Recommended action: None at this time. Staff is providing an update to city council on how the monetary donation from the trust of Kathleen Hugget to Westwood Hills Nature Center will be used. Policy consideration: Does the city council have any questions or concerns with the proposed use of the monetary donation from the trust of Kathleen Hugget? Summary: On November 17, 2014 the city council accepted the monetary donation of $245,342.59 from the trust of Kathleen Hugget with the restriction it be used for care and maintenance at Westwood Hills Nature Center. Staff recommends use of the monetary donation as follows (to be purchased in 2020 following completion of the new interpretive center): 1. Star lab (up to $30,000): provides astronomy education for all ages. 2. Additional public art (up to $75,000): possibly an iconic professional art piece at the main entrance for patrons to interact and take pictures with. This piece would be in addition to the art budgeted line item for the building project. 3. Enhance the nature-based play area (up to $125,000): enhance the currently budgeted nature-based play area for added enjoyment. 4. Staff recommends utilizing remaining funds to purchase donation benches as needed or other maintenance needs. All items will include a plaque honoring Kathleen Hugget for her gracious donation. Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used for the items specified in the report. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Jason T. West, Recreation Superintendent Reviewed by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: Study session Meeting date: March 11, 2019 Written report: 8 Executive summary Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Recommended action: No action required. Please inform staff if you would like a representative from Discover St. Louis Park (DSLP) to make a presentation on the report to the council. Policy consideration: Are the actions of Discover St. Louis Park in keeping with the council’s expectations? Does the council want a representative from DSLP to make a presentation on the annual report? Summary: Every year DSLP prepares an annual report on their activities and in the past presented it to the council. This year staff is proposing to forego the presentation unless requested by the council. Attached is a copy of the 2018 Annual Report including an executive summary, and the 2018 End of Year Presentation. As you will see in the report, 2018 proved to be another successful year with revenues up 25% from 2017. Per DSLP’s by-laws, the mayor and city manager have permanent seats on the DSLP board. Financial or budget considerations: Pursuant to state law the city retains five percent of the lodging tax proceeds collected monthly from the hotels. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: 2018 Annual Report 2018 DSLP End of Year Presentation Prepared by: Tom Harmening, City Manager 2018 ANNUAL REPORT Discover St. Louis Park’s mission is to strengthen the awareness of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley as a prime meeting and visitor destination, stimulate economic development and support community growth. TOURISM IN MINNESOTA TOURISM MEANS ECONOMIC VITALITY$15 billion in gross sales per year $41 million per day 265,000 full & part-time jobs 11% of private sector employment 17% of all MN sales taxes WHO ARE OUR VISITORS? •Average HHI: $80,140 •Average party: 1.9 •72% are married •Average age: 47 years old •71% leisure / 29% business •Length of stay: 2.3 nights WHERE DO OUR VISITORS COME FROM? •75% of metro area visitors are from MN, ND, SD, IA & WI •47% from Minnesota •80% arrive via car and travel an average of 311 miles one way Spending by sector St. Louis Park and Golden Valley’s 9 hotel properties collectively employed more than 490 people in 2018. Tourism generated $149 million in visitor spending throughout our communities. MARKETING TACTICS •Digital •Print Advertising •Connected TV •Radio •Billboards •Other Channels $10.3 billion or 69% of all MN tourism revenues are in the metro region 205% 153% 471% NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA IOWA 4% WISCONSIN MINNESOTA 70% of our web traffic comes from Minnesota & the four surrounding states 23.5% 21% 16.5% 16% 5% Food & Beverage Lodging 17% Retail Transportation Recreation Other Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Engaging Social Media •2018 occupancy is slightly down from 2017, a significant increase in annual supply of 23% was met by a slightly lower increase in demand of 22%. •It is typical for the Average Daily Rate (ADR) to move up or down with occupancy. However, despite stagnant annual occupancy, 2018 ADR is up from both 2016 and 2017. •Although the annual Revenue Per Available Room (RevPAR) increase from 2017 is being helped by the Super Bowl, 5 out of the 11 months, not including February, are greater than 2017. •Monthly revenues continue at a three year high, with 2018 revenues up 25% from 2017. Bimonthly E- Newsletter •“Sweet Happenings” •2,167 subscribers •19.3% open rate FACEBOOK 8,066 followers TWITTER 1,221 followers INSTAGRAM 974 followers 10% 2% 45% DSLP LODGING TAX SUMMARY $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $746,249 $805,421 $828,223 $860,761 $978,573 $ 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 $1,226,779 $ 15 MEMBER ACTIVE BOARD LEAD GENERATION & ESTIMATED ECONOMIC IMPACT Groups Leads Sent - 268 Total room night opportunities - 49, 228 Average EEI per lead - $58,011 Group EEI - $15,547,175 Leisure Leads - 14,880 Leisure EEI - $482,112 21% 41% Total Estimated Economic Impact: $16,029,287 DIGITAL MARKETING Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 3 2018 End of Year Report Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 4 2 A Destination Marketing Organization Representing St. Louis Park And Golden Valley Discover St. Louis Park’s mission is to strengthen the awareness of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley as a prime meeting and visitor destination, stimulate economic development and support community growth. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 5 Minnesota State Statute M.S. 469.190 Local Lodging Tax Ninety-five percent of the gross proceeds from any tax imposed under subdivision 1 shall be used by the statutory or home rule charter city or town to fund a local convention or tourism bureau for the purpose of marketing and promoting the city or town as a tourist or convention center. Discover St. Louis Park is a non-profit organization 501 (c) 6, governed by a 13-member board, plus representation from Golden Valley 3 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 6 $15 billion in gross sales a year $41 million per day 265,000 full and part-time jobs 11% of private sector employment 17% of all MN sales taxes Hennepin County: 4.7 billion and 79,869 jobs 4 Tourism in Minnesota 10.3 billion or 69% of all MN tourism revenues are in the metro region Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 7 Ø St. Louis Park and Golden Valley’s nine hotel properties collectively employed more than 490 people in 2018. Ø Tourism generated $149 million in visitor spending throughout our communities. Ø Tourism supports existing companies while stimulating the development of new business and event opportunity. 5 Tourism Means Economic Vitality for St. Louis Park and Golden Valley 23.5% 21% 17% 16.5% 16% 5% Travel Spending by Sector Food & Beverage Lodging Retail Transportation Recreation Other Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 8 21 23.5 17 16 16.5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 St. Louis Park Tourism Generates: SLP Lodging Tax (3%): $1,031,499 $1,031,499 in SLP lodging tax receipts (3%) = $33 million in lodging revenues (97%) = $125 million in visitor spending throughout the community Visitor Dollars: 21% spent on lodging 79% spent throughout the community 6 *Sources: Explore Minnesota Tourism, The Economic Expenditures by Travelers of Minnesota, Davidson-Peterson Associates, MN Dept. of Revenue, MN Dept. of Employment and Economic Development 79% of visitor spending is in the community while 21% is on lodging. Without tourism, many of your favorite businesses and establishments might not exist. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 9 21 23.5 17 16 16.5 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 Golden Valley Tourism Generates: GV Lodging Tax (3%): $195,280 $195,280 in GV lodging tax receipts (3%) = $6.3 million in lodging revenues (97%) = $24 million in visitor spending throughout the community Visitor Dollars: 21% spent on lodging 79% spent throughout the community 7 *Sources: Explore Minnesota Tourism, The Economic Expenditures by Travelers of Minnesota, Davidson-Peterson Associates, MN Dept. of Revenue, MN Dept. of Employment and Economic Development 79% of visitor spending is on “Main Street” while 21% is on lodging. Without tourism, many of your favorite businesses and establishments might not exist. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 10 No one relocates, Takes a new job, Buys a new home, OR Starts a business in a community without visiting first... Ø Tourism attracts new residents Ø Tourism attracts a strong work force Ø Tourism attracts new businesses Ø Tourism attracts new development Source: Longwoods International Research 2016 8 Tourism is a Precursor to Economic Development Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 11 9 What Happens When More Visitors Come to Town? The perception of the community is enhanced Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 12 10 What Happens When More Visitors Come to Town? The perception of the community is enhanced Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 13 11 What Happens When More Visitors Come to Town? The perception of the community is enhanced Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 14 1212 MYHockey Tournament, The ROC Super Bow LII Courtyard by Marriott Lawnbowling at Brookview Golden Valley Pride Festival Cast of Hamilton Golden Valley Arts & Music Festival Reveal Rooftop Bar at the AC Hotel Twin Cities Film Fest Dallas Smith Photography Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 15 13 Who Are Our Visitors? Ø Average HHI $80,140 Ø Average party 1.9 Ø 72% are married Ø Average age 47 years old Ø 71% leisure / 29% business Ø Length of say 2.3 nights Ø 50% of visitors are “day trippers” (travel 90 miles or more) Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 16 1414 Where Do Our Visitors Come From? 75% of metro area visitors are from MN, ND, SD, IA, and WI 47% are from Minnesota 70% of our web traffic comes from MN & the 4 surrounding states North Dakota -↑205% South Dakota -↑153% Iowa -↑471% Wisconsin -↑45% 80% arrive via car and travel an average of 311 miles one way Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 17 2018 Marketing Tactics Digital •New & improved website •Robust digital marketing program, with site retargeting & geofencing •Strong social media presence •Chinook Book app with mobile coupons •Sweet Happenings newsletter Print Advertising •Explore Minnesota Travel Guide •Minnesota Bride •Minnesota Meetings + Events •MN Getaways •MPLS/St. Paul Official Visitors Guide Connected TV •Roku, Chromecast, AppleTV, AmazonFire Radio •Minnesota Public Radio •The Current •KFAN Network •KOOL 108 Xmas •Pandora & Spotify •Twins Radio Network Billboards •Greater MN, North and South Dakota •MSP Airport –Concourses C, F, G & baggage claim Other Channels •Mall of America kiosk distribution •MSP Airport brochure distribution 15 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 18 1616 34% 23% 13% 12% 6% 4%4%4% Most Frequented Web Pages Entertainment Restaurants Shopping Hotels Plan Deals Events Contact 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 Age •55% Female •45% Male (↑29%) Website Statistics 33,644 unique visitors –↑23% over 2017 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 19 1717 Digital Marketing Bimonthly E-Newsletter •“Sweet Happenings” •2,167 subscribers •19.3% open rate Engaging Social Media •Facebook –8,066 followers, ↑10% •Twitter –1,221 followers, ↑2% •Instagram –974 followers, ↑45% Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 20 Lead Generation & Estimated Economic Impact Groups Leads Sent –268 (↑21%) Total room night opportunities –49,228 Average EEI* per lead –$58,011 (↑41%) Group EEI –$15,547,175 * Sources: Explore Minnesota Tourism, The Economic Impact of Expenditures by Travelers on Minnesota, Davidson-Peterson Associates; MN Dept. of Revenue, MN Dept. of Employment & Economic Development, Bureau of Labor Statistics; U.S. Travel Association. 18 Leisure Leads* –14,880 Leisure EEI** –$482,112 TOTAL ESTIMATED ECONOMIC IMPACT : $16,029,287 *Estimated Economic Impact: Overnight visitor: $245 x # of nights stayed Event attendee (no room night): $70 x # of days attended *Leisure leads = Destination Guides distributed to visitors and residents (print and digital) **1,488 x $108 x 3 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 21 1919 Broadened Sales Efforts •Focus on new markets §Faith/Religious | Associations | Medical | Environmental | Technology •Second person added to sales team •Implemented event/sports grant •Investment in HelmsBriscoe & Cvent §Industry leaders in event sourcing •Enhanced relationships with meeting planners §Emphasis on groups seeking to be just outside of major cities Expansion/Upgrade of Community Amenities •Addition of two hotel properties •Major renovation of Parks & Rec facilities §Recreation Outdoor Center (ROC) | Brookview | Theodore Wirth TrailHead •Continued growth of dining and entertainment options §Lucky Cricket | Lat14 | REM5 VR Lab | SLP Nest | Five Guys Key Growth Factors Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 22 21 *Sources: Explore Minnesota Tourism, The Economic Impact of Expenditures by Travelers on Minnesota, Davidson- Peterson Associates; MN Dept. of Revenue, MN Dept. of Employment & Economic Development, Bureau of Labor Statistics; U.S. Travel Association.20 2018 Group Highlights MYHockey –Gopher State Outdoor Veterans Cup •21 teams (ages 9-14) from outside of MN •Hosted at the SLP Rec Center & the ROC •428 room nights and 368 event attendees •Estimated Economic Impact: $182,140 Cast & Crew of Hamilton •Transportation Grant used to secure group •DSLP provided gift baskets to each visitor §Instagram shout out from one of the main characters! •45 rooms over 42 nights = 1,890 room nights •Estimated Economic Impact: $463,050 MLB RBI (Reviving Baseballs in Inner Cities) World Series •Included teams from Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands •1,067 rooms over two weeks •Estimated Economic Impact: $261,415 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 23 21 Community Partner: St. Louis Park Marketing Initiatives Ø Children First –Ice Cream Social Ø Common Sound Music Festival Ø Community Link – Meadowbrook Ø Dollars for Scholars Ø Friends of the Arts Ø Historical Society Ø Parktacular –Ambassadors Sponsor Ø Rotary Bundled Up Winter Fun Day Ø SLP 1st Annual Art Fair Ø SLP Police Crime Prevention Fund Ø STEP –Holiday Train Ø Ugly Sweater Dash Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 24 22 Community Partner: Golden Valley Marketing Initiatives Ø Brookview Hole Sponsorship Flower Garden Sponsorship Ø Human Services Commission Golf & Lawn Bowling Fundraiser Ø Arts & Music Festival Ø Pride Festival Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 25 2323 - 20,000.00 40,000.00 60,000.00 80,000.00 100,000.00 120,000.00 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 DSLP Lodging Tax SLP Summary Collection began in March of 2011 Inventory was relatively consistent through 2017 Two hotels (268 hotel rooms) were added in 2018 Seven Hotels / 1,117 Rooms Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 26 DSLP Lodging Tax GV Summary 24 Collection began in January 2017 Two Hotels / 244 Rooms 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 2017 2018 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 27 DSLP Lodging Tax Summary $746,249 $805,421 $828,223 $860,761 $978,573 $1,226,779 $- $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 25 +53,766 +59,172 +22,802 +32,538 +117,812 +$207,389 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 28 26 Looking Ahead -Strategic Landscape Ø 22% more hotel rooms available in the metro area than in 2016. Ø Visitors to the metro are continues to increase. Ø Metro area has 20+ CVB’s (DMO’s) all competing for the same visitor. Ø Occupancy was relatively flat year-over-year in 2018, as was the case for most metro hotels. Ø Annual occupancy was still at 68% (a solid percentage). Ø Demand and Revenue outdid the metro area. Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 29 27 2018 Accomplishments Enhanced lead generation year-over-year by 21% Entered into contracts with Helmsbriscoe and Cvent to help enhance quantity and quality of our leads... making DSLP a stronger player in the tourism marketIncreased our Program Expense budget to foster the mission of DSLP year-over-year by $190,237 Introduced ‘Sweet Happenings’ a bimonthly e-newsletter to increase followers and enhance our brand Launched a new website with enhanced ability for stories, blogs, photos and a calendar of events Saw a substantial increase in visitors from North Dakota, South Dakota and Iowa, which aligned with our digital advertising efforts Took our social marketing efforts to another level by increasing engagement year-over year in the following areas: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 30 28 Strategic Objectives 2019 Ø Increase Lead Generation Ø Focus efforts to increase non- peak hotel stays (1st and 4th Quarter, Friday’s –Sunday) Ø Increase overnight hotel stays Ø Leverage resources via partnerships (EMT Sports Coalition, Metro Marketing Committee, Meet Minneapolis) Ø Maximize efforts with Cvent and Helmsbriscoe ST. LOUIS PARK & GOLDEN VALLEY 2019 DESTINATION GUIDE Sneak Peak: Adam Turman Original Design Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 31 DSLP Staff 29 Becky Bakken President & CEO Matt Ryan Office Administrator Trish Foster Marketing Manager Seth Flolid Business Development Manager Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 32 Brad Bakken –Citizens Independent Bank (Treasurer) Kelly Basham, Director of Sales –TPI Hospitality Jody Coyer, Senior Property Manager (West End) –Mid America Group Tim Cruikshank, City Manager –City of Golden Valley Tom Harmening, City Manager –City of St. Louis Park Mike Kottke, Director of Sales & Marketing –DoubleTree by Hilton Minneapolis -Park Place Dan Maurer, Director of Sales –Minneapolis Marriott West & Courtyard by Marriott Doug McIntyre, Senior Attorney –Foley & Mansfield (Past Chair) Deb McMillan, Director of Government Affairs –TwinWest Chamber of Commerce Jatin Setia –Twin Cities Film Fest John Smith, President –Smith Architects (Chair) Jake Spano, Mayor –City of St. Louis Park Phil Weber, Owner –Park Tavern 2018 Board of Directors 30 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 33 Questions? 31 Study session meeting of March 11, 2019 (Item No. 8) Title: Discover St. Louis Park 2018 Annual Report Page 34