Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2019/04/15 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study Session
AGENDA APRIL 22, 2019 5:30 p.m. GROUNDBREAKING FOR WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CENTER INTERPRETIVE CENTER BUILDING Westwood Hills Nature Center (8300 W. Franklin Ave.) 6:30 p.m. RECONVENE LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION (LBAE) Council chambers Immediately following LBAE STUDY SESSION Community room Discussion items 1. 5 mins. Future study session agenda planning 2. 45 mins. Parkway Commons development proposal 3. 45 mins. 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission 5 mins. Communications/updates (verbal) Written reports 4. Food security and access study 5. March 2019 monthly financial report 6. First quarter investment report (Jan. – March 2019) 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. 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene – April 22, 2019 City Council Chambers Proposed agenda 1. Reconvene the St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization 2. Roll Call – Declaration of Quorum 3. Acknowledgement of Trained Members (Miller & Rog) 4. Acknowledgement of Assessing Staff Members in Attendance 5. Review of Properties in Appeal a. Board Action - Where Petitioner & Assessing Staff are Not in Agreement b. Board Action – Where Petitioner has requested late addition to roster and staff has not had time to respond with revaluation (these continue until the board re-convenes). c. Board Action – Where Petitioner has denied access or has not responded d. Board Action - Where Petitioner & Assessing Staff are in Mutual Agreement For the appeals in the first three categories above, it is suggested that the board reviews them and takes action individually. For the fourth category (mutual agreement), each parcel may be read into the record and the board may take one group action per DOR direction (April 2016). 6. Instruct Assessor to Complete Record of Changes for Submittal 7. Instruct Assessor to Inform Petitioners of Board Action via Mail 8. Complete the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Certification Form 9. Adjourn if Board business is completed Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Page 2 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Background for the 2019 St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization All property owners are entitled to the right of appeal regarding their classification and market value. The City is required by statute to conduct a Local Board of Appeal & Equalization meeting to hear appeals, or open book meeting or transfer the Board to the County. The focus of the board is on: the property classification which is determined by the property’s use; and, the market value which is based on the characteristics of the real estate and market conditions as of the date of the assessment (January 2, 2019). Minnesota statute requires that all properties are assessed at full market value. The two dominant definitions of market value are: MN Statute 272.03 – “Market value” means the usual selling price at the place where the property to which the term is applied shall be at the time of assessment; being the price which could be obtained at a private sale or an auction sale, if it is determined by the assessor that the price from the auction sale represents an arm’s length transaction. The price obtained at a forced sale shall not be considered. Appraisal Institute – The most probable price, as of a specified date, in cash or in terms equivalent to cash, or in other precisely revealed terms, for which the specified property rights should sell after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and for self-interest, and assuming that neither is under undue duress. (The Appraisal of Real Estate, 13th Edition, Appraisal Institute [2008], page 23) The Board convened on April 8, 2019 at which meeting a total of forty-one (41) parcels were recognized to be under appeal. The Board set the process and chose to reconvene April 22 to hear the merit of each appeal and to rule on them. A few housekeeping observations are made for the reference of the board. • One trained and certified Board member (Miller & Rog) must be present at each meeting the Board is in session. Best practice is for multiple trained members. • It is essential that the Board rules on each question before it and likewise that the Board recognizes that it can reduce, sustain or increase valuations as deemed necessary. • The time window for the board to conclude business is 20 days after convening (deadline for completion is April 27, 2019). • Important – DOR direction: “It is the board’s responsibility to hear all appeals presented until the board adjourns. A property owner can present their appeal at the initial meeting or at any of the reconvene meetings. The board must hear that appeal and make a decision. The board cannot dismiss the property owner’s appeal, unless the meeting is adjourned.” The Hennepin County Assessor has reviewed that language and requested that Local Boards accept all appeal queries until final adjournment. We are doing so. • At the writing of this Board packet, staff has thus added twelve (12) additional appeals to the roster and endeavored to respond in a timely fashion. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Page 3 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization • Prior to adjourning, the board should instruct the assessor to submit a record of their actions on the Department of Revenue required form. • Finally, the Local Board of Appeal Certification Form must be signed at each Board meeting by all Board members present. Background to Valuation Methodologies: The statistical modeling associated with the mass assessment accommodates variations between neighborhoods, within neighborhoods and includes consideration of location, age, style, size, finish materials, condition, updating, etc. depending on the information available. The Local Board process differs from mass valuation modeling in that the assessing staff re-appraises the subject property by direct comparison to market transactions. As part of the informal review process, staff frequently re-inspects properties to review the accuracy of our data. Adjustments and valuation change orders have been made where necessary prior to the Board. In cases where the revaluation does not result in a conclusion satisfactory to the appellant, the appeal process has been outlined. As such, the Local Board depends on active participation from all parties involved including the property owner, assessing staff and the board members. All property owners are requested to state their basis of appeal, their opinion of the market value and informed that they may present information supporting their opinion of value and/or classification. The assessing staff in turn re-inspects the property and/or visits with the owner in order to verify the physical characteristics forming the analysis basis followed by a re- appraisal of the subject property. Staff also engages the owner in discussion to review the appeal question(s) and to reach agreement where possible before the board reconvenes. Focal Points for the Board – Agenda as Indicated on Cover Sheet, decisions on: 1. Board Action – Five (5) appeals have not been resolved to a mutual agreement between the property owner and assessing staff. It is requested that the Board hear and decide the merits of each case. We have informed each property owner that the Board commonly allows 5-10 minutes for presentation followed by a 3-5 minute presentation by the assessing staff. The Board may adjust these time allowances as needed. 2. Board Action – per the DOR direction we have accepted twelve (12) appeals after the April 8 meeting. These appeals are highlighted yellow on the revised roster. Three (3) appeals are not at a stage of completion at this time. Staff has completed inspection on one parcel and is in the process of working up the valuation review. The other two we are awaiting response to our inspection request. We ask that the Board hear these appeals as directed by MN DOR. 3. Board Action – for cases where the petitioner has denied access. One (1) appeal fits this category as inspection has been requested but not granted at the time of packet preparation. The Board is reminded that they may not take action that would benefit the property owner where inspection is denied. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Page 4 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization 4. Board Action – Forty-four (44) appeals have been reviewed with the result that the property owner and assessing staff have reached a mutually acceptable valuation (no classifications were appealed). It is requested that the resolution for each parcel be read into the record after which the Board may take one group action to affirm the mutually agreed upon valuations. Following your decision, each property owner will be notified via letter of the Board action and to remind them that they are eligible to appeal to the County Board. The Hennepin County Board of Appeal and Equalization begins June 17, 2019. An application is requested by the County no later than May 22nd. To appear before the County Board, all appellants must first have appealed to the St. Louis Park Board of Appeal and Equalization. Property owners may also appeal directly to the Minnesota State Tax Court. Thank you for serving on the Board. Prepared by: St. Louis Park Assessing Staff Cory Bultema, City Assessor Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Page 5 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Tab Summary Background & Focal Points for the Board Tab 1: Overview of All Appeals for Board Action (Agenda & updated roster will also be handed out to the Board for the meeting) Tab 2: Moore Appeal – Owner Submittal Tab 3: Moore Appeal – Staff Report Tab 4: Childers Appeal – Owner Submittal Tab 5: Childers Appeal – Staff Report Tab 6: Lohese Appeal – Staff Report (owner did not supply materials for the Board report) Tab 7: Temkin Appeal – Staff Report (owner did not supply materials for the Board report) Tab 8: Dobrin Appeal – Staff Report (owner did not supply materials for the Board report) Tab 9: MMP (Town Place Suites) Appeal – Staff Report Tab 10: 36 Park LLC (The Verge Apartments) Appeal – Staff Report Contact After published date - add to roster per DOR Directive Reference 2019 Appealed Assessing Owner Board Name Property Address Property ID #2018 Value Classification 2019 Value Revaluation Indicated Action Judith Moore 1430 Independence Ave S 06-117-21-32-0036 206,900 R - Single Family H 241,800 260,000 Appeal Colleen Childers 4412 44th St W 07-028-24-34-0038 549,800 R - Single Family Non 598,100 Sustain Appeal Esakakondo Lohese 2628 Vernon Ave S 09-117-21-31-0081 237,100 R - Single Family H 266,200 230,000 Appeal Eli & Emma Temkin 2730 Ottawa Ave S 31-029-24-31-0105 514,000 R - Single Family H 533,500 Sustain Appeal Joseph Dobrin 2512 Quentin Ct 31-029-24-24-0026 359,100 Y - Townhouse H 377,300 Sustain Appeal Virgil Voeller II 2809 Joppa Ave S 31-029-24-44-0065 438,300 R - Single Family H 474,900 Pending Appeal Rob Schwartz 2918 Huntington Ave S 31-029-24-44-0027 262,600 R - Single Family H 275,100 Pending Appeal Anthony Dinicola 6126 42nd St W 21-117-21-32-0080 496,200 R - Single Family H 537,100 Pending Appeal David A Podany Rev Trust 1700 State Highway 100 31-029-24-22-0001 2,778,400 I - Industrial 3,472,000 No Inspection Appeal MMP (by representative)1400 Zarthan Ave S 04-117-21-32-0089 6,307,000 C - Commercial 7,420,000 Sustain Acknowledge Phillip Murphy 1841 Hampshire Ave S 05-117-21-44-0080 211,800 R - Single Family H 230,400 206,000 Agree 36 Park LLC 3601 Park Center Blvd 06-028-24-33-0019 44,160,000 A - Apartment 47,040,000 Sustain Acknowledge Olsen & Luetschwager 3665 Huntington Ave S 06-028-24-44-0048 562,600 R - Single Family H 572,200 540,000 Agree Benjamin Wheeler 3660 Glenhurst Ave 06-028-24-44-0051 622,300 R - Single Family H 666,800 618,300 Agree Donna & Todd Gause 1300 Independence Ave S 06-117-21-32-0012 278,800 R - Single Family H 329,800 313,000 Agree Thomas & Sheila Letscher 8900 Westmoreland Ln 06-117-21-34-0012 853,700 R - Single Family H 853,700 815,000 Agree Arlis & Erwin Grossman 1640 Virginia Ave S 06-117-21-44-0052 441,600 R - Single Family H 441,600 430,700 Agree James Benda 8500 Virginia Cir S 07-117-21-13-0055 257,800 R - Single Family H 280,100 265,000 Agree Rande Garnett 2200 Flag Ave S 07-117-21-22-0017 308,900 R - Single Family H 335,900 308,900 Agree Thomas & Ilene Adam 4233 Toledo Ave S 07-028-24-32-0158 586,200 R - Single Family Non 660,400 621,000 Agree Dalton Schmidt 4104 Utica Ave S 07-028-24-32-0001 395,400 R - Single Family H 427,700 410,800 Agree Kenneth Braun 8054 Victoria Way 07-117-21-41-0082 372,000 Y - Townhouse H 400,500 376,000 Agree Jason & Katrina Schlude 2535 Aquila Ave S 07-117-21-42-0084 288,500 R - Single Family H 316,300 300,000 Agree Richard Thomson 9344 28th St W 07-117-21-33-0050 845,100 R - Single Family H 918,100 895,000 Agree Candace Huzel 2605 Xylon Ave S 07-117-21-42-0013 289,500 R - Single Family H 315,100 270,000 Agree Paul Beshah 7719 22nd St W 08-117-21-22-0022 304,900 R - Single Family H 310,500 260,000 Agree Kenneth Koehler 2531 Pennsylvania Ave S 08-117-21-24-0041 276,300 R - Single Family H 307,400 271,000 Agree ROSTER - City of St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization - Convene April 8, 2019 Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 6 Contact After published date - add to roster per DOR Directive Reference 2019 Appealed Assessing Owner Board Name Property Address Property ID #2018 Value Classification 2019 Value Revaluation Indicated Action ROSTER - City of St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization - Convene April 8, 2019 Nolan & Carey Goodman 7931 25th St W 08-117-21-32-0030 407,400 R - Single Family H 441,300 400,000 Agree Susan Boen 2945 Rhode Island Ave S 08-117-21-33-0133 249,000 R - Single Family H 269,000 252,000 Agree Susan Bloyer 2935 Pennsylvania Ave S 08-117-21-34-0091 276,400 R - Single Family H 278,900 245,000 Agree Dale Anderson 2700 Vernon Ave S 09-117-21-31-0102 281,900 R - Single Family H 306,100 287,000 Agree Jennifer Dalquist 2830 Webster Ave S 09-117-21-34-0043 337,300 R - Single Family H 365,200 350,000 Agree Douglas Hughes 3204 Colorado Ave S 16-117-21-22-0115 338,800 R - Single Family H 371,700 359,000 Agree Peter Flom 3301 Yosemite Ave S 16-117-21-24-0103 264,000 R - Single Family H 290,300 278,000 Agree Daniel Wesser 3344 Zarthan Ave S 16-117-21-24-0185 423,100 R - Single Family H 461,800 446,000 Agree Keith Lutgen 3418 Yosemite Ave S 16-117-21-31-0025 373,200 R - Single Family H 412,300 392,000 Agree Wade Linkert 3049 Kentucky Ave S 17-117-21-12-0059 364,200 R - Single Family H 401,200 388,500 Agree Nicolle Schneider 3213 Jersey Ave S 17-117-21-13-0053 362,000 R - Single Family Non 392,900 380,000 Agree Ryan & Kelsey Conant 3100 Pennsylvania Ave S 17-117-21-22-0048 416,300 R - Single Family H 421,200 383,000 Agree Matthew Eckholm 3135 Texas Ave S 17-117-21-22-0094 237,200 R - Single Family H 263,200 250,000 Agree Brigita Petrovic 3675 Independence Ave S #43 18-117-21-33-0164 188,100 Y - Townhouse H 201,300 195,000 Agree Brett Hoffman 8624 35th St W 18-117-21-42-0080 317,300 R - Single Family H 338,700 320,000 Agree Cynthia Davies 7409 Edgebrook Dr 20-117-21-21-0069 159,500 R - Single Family H 203,700 175,000 Agree Paul Salmela 7121 Excelsior Way 20-117-21-24-0038 176,700 Y - Townhouse Non 201,500 Sustain Agree Rachel Meyer 4045 Xenwood Ave S 21-117-21-24-0132 284,400 R - Single Family H 330,000 295,000 Agree Donna Dahnke 1630-32 Natchez Ave S 30-029-24-34-0055 338,200 DB - Duplex Non 348,700 330,000 Agree Barbara Ratner Trust 2301 Parklands Rd 31-029-24-12-0067 1,002,900 R - Single Family H 947,900 925,000 Agree Dorothy Lebakken 2540 Lynn Ave S 31-029-24-13-0074 483,400 R - Single Family H 505,800 490,000 Agree Paul Lauber & Ellen O'Gara 2643 Vernon Ave S 31-029-24-32-0023 293,500 R - Single Family H 292,300 Sustain Agree Matthew Johnson 2717 Huntington Ave S 31-029-24-41-0020 627,400 R - Single Family H 650,100 585,000 Agree Kimberly Schexnayder 2721 Joppa Ave S 31-029-24-41-0048 375,100 R - Single Family H 390,800 375,100 Agree Ann Lebens 2924 France Ave S 31-029-24-44-0009 440,000 A - Apartment (H-1)500,000 Contact >Withdraw Louis Goldenberg 2822 France Ave S 31-029-24-44-0113 701,300 R - Single Family H 726,200 690,000 Agree Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 7 St. Louis Park MINNESOTA Name: APPLICATION TO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL & EQUALIZATION Jui+ Dorce Home Phone. @f2 5gt-@(ge_ ANe. < Address: [3¢ T) -ep do g ciy: iast aus Pc, Day-Time [?hone: sac &: Zip code: N ©.SE2 © Address of Property to Appeal: &y(' Property ID # ((G = A-21 -32-003, 2019 Assessed Market Value as it appears on the Notice: Owner Occupied or Rental Z &\, gy0 0 Date of Purchase: Purchase Price: Owner's Opinion of Value: Date & Valuation of Appraisal Please attach a complete copy of the appraisal for review. Additions, Renovations or Improvements since Purchase: _ Cost of Addition, Renovations or Improvements since Purchase: _ Please provide comparable sales documentation supporting the owner's opinion of market value? If a rental property, please submit: a building floorplan showing gross and net rentable area square footage; rent roll as of the assessment date; and, annual income/ expense statements for the past and projected current year. This information will be reviewed for valuation via the Income Approach. The information submitted will be held confidential and not released to the public. I Do /. Do not wish to make a personal appearance. ---:---Jf-lA.N¥1,P<JiiF----,..,-'--~__e__~==------ Sig The Local Board of Appeal and Equalization convenes at 6.00 pm on April 8, 2019 in the 3 Floor Council Chambers at City I-fall. By submitting this application, your appeal will be entered into the record and it is not required to attend the first Board meeting. You will be notified via phone and letter of the reconvene meeting where the Board will hear your appeal. This application must be received prior to the meeting. The appeal process depends on you to present information supporting your opinion of value and/ or classification. This includes an appraisal or locally competitive sales data. Inspection access must be granted for Assessing staff or the Board to make a change benefitting the property owner. We strongly encourage you to contact the Assessor's Office at 952-924-2535 well before the Board meeting. Appeals can often be resolved at the informal discussion level and you may not need to appear before the Board. For informal discussion, re-inspection scheduling and review of your valuation please return this application to the Assessor's Office on or before March 25, 2019. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 8 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Judith M. Moore 1430 Independence Ave S 06-117-21-32-0036 2019 Assessed Value: $241,800 Recommendation: $260,000 This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 9 City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Judith M. MooreProperty Owner(s): 1430 Independence Ave S Property Address: 06-117-21-32-0036PID #: Market Value $241,800Assessment Year 2019 $206,900Assessment Year 2018 $193,100Assessment Year 2017 Sale:April 1, 1988 - 75,500 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: $260,000 Appraiser: LC April 3, 2019 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject property is located at 1430 Independence Avenue in the Westdale neighborhood. The home is a single family one-story dwelling that is currently classified as homestead. The home has been well maintained and in average condition. In 2006 there was a 196 square foot addition to the main level that included remodeling of the kitchen and adding a dining area. The kitchen remodel included new cabinetry, laminate counter tops, tile backsplash and lighting. A new gas fireplace insert was installed in the main level fireplace in 2016. There are five (5) comparable sales selected as the best indicator of value for the 2019 assessment. All comparable sales are located within the subject’s competitive market area. Adjustments have been applied based on differences in amenities and/or physical characteristics. These adjustments are market extracted based on paired sales analysis. Comparable sale 1, 2 and 3 are considered the best indicators of market value as they are located on the same block and share similar characteristics to the subject in terms of location, condition, size, design/style, and overall market appeal. Also note, that comparable 1 and 2 are also located on the same side of Independence Ave as the subject property which backs up to Highway 169. Comparable 4 and 5 were added as additional support and to help bracket the many features the subject property exhibits. Based on the market data in this report, the appraiser’s recommendation is to increase the 2019 Assessed value to $260,000. 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 10 Subject Data Summary PID #:06-117-21-32-0036 Property Address:1430 Independence Ave S St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Multiple Address:No Lot/Block:007/003 Addition:Westdale Legal(120): Owner(s):Judith M Moore Property Classification:Residential - Homestead 2019 EMV:241,800 2018 EMV:206,900 2017 EMV:193,100 Last Sale:4/1/1988 - 75,500 - Warranty Deed - 01 Lot Size:8,319 Sq.Ft. / Acres Zoning:R1 Dwelling Type:Single Family Style:One Level/Rambler Bedrooms:3 Baths:2 Actual Year Built:1956 Gross Building Area:1,156 Basement Area:960 Bsmt Finished %:40 Garage #1:1 Car Tuck Under Garage #2:None 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 11 Additional Subject Photos Front View'19 Rear View 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 12 Additional Subject Photos Living Room Kitchen 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 13 Additional Subject Photos Dining Area Bathroom 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 14 Additional Subject Photos Lower Level Bathroom 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 15 Sales Comparables Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3Item PID 0611721320036 0611721320032 0611721320037 0611721320065 Address 1430 Independence Ave S 1410 Independence Ave S 1436 Independence Ave S 1405 Independence Ave S Weight 91 Neighborhood 0034 0034 0034 0034 District 04 04 04 04 Sale Price $75,500 $309,000 $281,000 $255,000 Sale Date 04/01/1988 03/02/2018 07/26/2018 09/04/2018 Cash Equivalent $279,500 $247,500 Year / Version 2019 / 1 2018 / 1 2019 / 1 2019 / 1 Price Per Sq. Ft.$65.31 $297.12 $291.15 $271.38 Dwelling Type Single Family Single Family Single Family Single Family Style One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler Property Area 8,319 9,324 5,854 Actual Age 1956 1956 1956 1957 Effective Age 1986 1999 1990 1967 Quality Class B08 B07 B08 B08 1st Floor Area 1,156 1,040 960 912 Total GBA 1,156 1,040 960 912 Finished Area 1,540 1,850 1,200 1,368 Basement Area 960 900 960 912 Basement Finished (%) 40%90%25%50% 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms 3 4 3 3 Total Bathrooms 2 2 1 1 Garage 1 Floor Area 336 483 240 Garage 1 # of Cars 1 1 1 Garage 1 Placement Tuck Under Detached Tuck Under Total # of Cars 1 1 1 Walkout Type Standard Walkout Air Conditioning Central Central Central Central Pool Area-Total Fireplaces 2 2 Deck Area-Total 192 Porches Dormer Length River Lake Influences Highway/Freeway Highway/Freeway Highway/Freeway 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 16 Sales Comparables Item Comparable 5Comparable 4Subject PID 0611721320036 0611721320082 0611721320038 Address 1430 Independence Ave S 1416 Flag Ave S 1440 Independence Ave S Weight 85 Neighborhood 0034 0034 0034 District 04 04 04 Sale Price $75,500 $265,000 $269,900 Sale Date 04/01/1988 10/05/2018 09/11/2018 Cash Equivalent Year / Version 2019 / 1 2019 / 1 2019 / 1 Price Per Sq. Ft.$65.31 $242.67 $281.15 Dwelling Type Single Family Single Family Single Family Style One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler Property Area 8,319 8,208 9,314 Actual Age 1956 1956 1958 Effective Age 1986 1971 1978 Quality Class B08 B08 B08 1st Floor Area 1,156 1,092 960 Total GBA 1,156 1,092 960 Finished Area 1,540 1,747 1,296 Basement Area 960 1,092 960 Basement Finished (%) 40%60%35% 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms 3 2 3 Total Bathrooms 2 2 2 Garage 1 Floor Area 336 288 240 Garage 1 # of Cars 1 1 1 Garage 1 Placement Tuck Under Tuck Under Tuck Under Total # of Cars 1 1 1 Walkout Type Air Conditioning Central Central Central Pool Area-Total Fireplaces 2 2 2 Deck Area-Total 440 272 Porches 160 Dormer Length River Lake Influences Highway/Freeway 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 17 Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 18 Sales Comparables Comparable 4 Comparable 5 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 19 Comparable 41416 Flag Ave S Subject1430 Independence Ave S Comparable 51440 Independence Ave S Comparable 21436 Independence Ave S Comparable 11410 Independence Ave S Comparable 31405 Independence Ave S 1166TTHHSSTTWW WWEESSTTMMOORREELLAANNDDLLNN EEBBII339944TTOOSSBB HH WW YY116699 NNBBHHWWYY116699TTOOEEBBII3399441144TTHH SSTT WW WAYZATA BLVDWAYZATA BLVD HIGHWAY 169HIGHWAY 169HIGHWAY 169HIGHWAY 16911 66TTHH SSTT WW 11 88 TTHH SS TT WWIINNDDEEPPEENNDDEENNCCEEAAVVEESS1166TTHHSSTTWW FLAG AVE SFLAG AVE SHILLSBORO AVE SHILLSBORO AVE SIINNDDEEPPEENNDDEENNCCEEAAVVEESSFAIRWAY LNFAIRWAY LNEEBB II339944TTOO NN BB HH WW YY116699SSSSBBHHWWYY116699 SS TT OO EEBBII339944FFLLAAGGA A V V EE SSFFRROONNTTAAGGEERRDD KKIILLMMEERRAAVVEEKILMER AVEKILMER AVEJORDAN AVE SJORDAN AVE SComparables for1430 Independence Ave S Subject Comparable 250 Feet Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 20 Mar 27 19 05:03p The Childers Group 952-486-8488 p.2 JI/ S. Louis Park III rl»so» gr# #; - ,gee! tees-re a a» l35.f ? ,,, ·-g s o» SJ 3Miu]" s«ace. i 5sis] Address ofProperty to Appeak: < _ '( Property ID Owner Occupied_ orRental- 2019 Assessed Market Value as it appears on J8e Notice: t._5..-,c:...q+-~-"'-<t-J,{,.,.r:C]..,,,,._~-----------'---- Dae or a.33f' ass IPL75 oaces'opoiooorvaoe 1 Date & Valuation of Appraisal Please a~raJ-h ~co pletc copy of · revi~~- Additions, Renovations or Improvements since Percha se: I2rs]'ON yr-l1?' 7,,, 4CD) &9s o Du • r 35," {3 15,,,2.pr Please prnvide comps,,,J£/.'f?!!Lcum=mtio suppo/£,g the owW. opinion of market value?' If a rental property, please submit: a building floorplan showing gross and net rentable area square footage; rent roll as of he assessment date; and, annual income/expense statements for the past and projected current year. This information will be reviewed for valuation via the Income Approach. The information submitted will be held confidential an d not released to the public. rs _o roe ,wioakeaposoatapseaoee/'re=e , f hy nf@ ·et sf) 3(@ «. (2 () ®@@e {Foss@fctsones fhe L~c:iri:!oard o~peal and Equalizaqt;n Knve~ 6:00 pm on April 8, 2019 in the 3° Floor Council Chambers at City Hall. By submitting this application, your appeal will be entered into the record and it is not required to attend the first Board mecting. You will be notified via phone and letter of the reconvene meeting where the Board will hear your appeal. This application must be received prior to the meeting. The appeal process depends on you to present information supporting your opinion of value and/or classification. This includes an appraisal or locally competitive sales data. Inspection access must be granted for As sessing staff or the Board to make a change benefi tin g the property owner. We strongly encourage you to contact the Assessor's Office at 952-924-2535 well before the Board meeting. Appeals can often be resolved at the informal discussion level and you may not need to appear before the Board. For informal discussion, re-inspection scheduling and review of your valuation please return this 4757 7" Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 21 M a r 27 19 05.03p The Childers Group 952-486-8488 p.3 ______ .:._ _ To whom it may concern I am appealing the property value of 4412 West 44 Street. We have less than .25 lot and it is divided up poorly leaving no real back yard. We have made two large improvements. The first one I believe 2008 (not certain as I am not at my residence at this time). Main reasons for improvement were problems with roof leaking and the electrical was knob and tube, the house was a fire waiting to happen. Main bathroom had a rusty brown color to it and it smelled funky. The house was old and other than paint and putting in cupboards given to us updating appliances we just took care of what we could. We were in Lexington, KV for 8 years at which time we had a housekeeper check on and take care of the house. Then the problems started continual water damage in lower level, electrical, leaky roof and plumbing. can't cover everything. This is the reason for the big renovation that either began or ended in 2008. I believe the renovation was $175,000.00 the less expensive items we had chosen prior to this were not longer up to code making the pricing higher. The second renovation occurred the end of 2015 we had to put in a drainage system in the basement. That cost was $10,500.00 one cost I could access. Midsummer 2015 we realized one wall they ran the length of the house needed drain tile also. I do not know that price. At this point the entire basement was ripped up so we went ahead and decided to remodel. Again we ran into so many code updates the price kept going up. The project finished almost 3 years ago. Cost for project was approximately $100,000.00. We had to replace two radiators in the upstairs due to malfunction it was past the time of warra ntee from builder. We had to fix some electrical something done incorrectly within the walls. The new walls started cracking about a year after project was finished. We have repaired some and are waiting on a time when finances work for this. In summer of 2018 air conditioner gave out it was over 30 years old. We have not replaced it the amount from bids is $14-$22,000 at about the same time the boiler was noted as maybe another year but if it went out mid winter to be aware of frozen pipes and flooding. We continue to pour money into a home we can barely afford. The reasons for all of this data are to share a significant reason for the valuation of our home. Secondly, the evaluation doesn't take into consideration these cost when evaluating the home. Thirdly along with myself and a lot of others as the taxes keep going up the homes are becoming too expensive. Several of us may be forced to sell and then we become another tear down. Linden Hills, Brown dale and Morningside will lose the appeal it once had. Sincerely Colleen Childers-Fogarty Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 22 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Colleen Childers Fogarty Terry Childers 4412 44th St W 07-028-24-34-0038 2019 Assessed Value: $598,100 Recommendation: $598,100 This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 23 City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Colleen Childers FogartyProperty Owner(s): Terry Childers 4412 44th St W Property Address: 07-028-24-34-0038PID #: Market Value $598,100Assessment Year 2019 $549,800Assessment Year 2018 $508,500Assessment Year 2017 Sale:November 1, 1998 - 176,500 (03 - Estate Deed) Assessor Recommendation: $598,100 Appraiser: LC August 22, 2018 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject property is located at 4412 44th St W in the Browndale neighborhood. The home is a single family one-story dwelling that is currently classified as non-homestead. The home is in very good condition. In recent years, the subject property underwent significant remodeling and renovations. These improvements include, but are not limited to; newly remodeled kitchen that features a large center island, custom cabinetry and higher-end counter tops. Between 2007 and 2008, there was a 540 square foot addition added to the main level that included updates to the laundry room, two bathrooms, bedrooms and a great room. Between 2016 and 2017, the lower level was completely remodeled that features a game room area, two new bedrooms, a second laundry area, ¾ bathroom, and a family room with a gas fireplace. There are four (4) comparable sales selected as the best indicator of value for the 2019 assessment. All comparable sales are located within the subject’s competitive market area. Adjustments have been applied based on differences in amenities and/or physical characteristics. These adjustments are market extracted based on paired sales analysis. Comparable sale 1 and 2 are considered the best indicators of market value as they share similar characteristics to the subject in terms of quality/condition, size, design/style, and overall market appeal. Comparable 3 and 4 were added as additional support and to help bracket the many features the subject property exhibits. Based on the market data in this report, the appraiser’s recommendation is to sustain the 2019 Assessed value at $598,100. 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 24 Subject Data Summary PID #:07-028-24-34-0038 Property Address:4412 44th St W St. Louis Park, MN 55424 Multiple Address:No Lot/Block:000/012 Addition:Browndale Park Legal(120):WLY 1&2 OF LOTS 10 AND 11 Owner(s):Colleen Childers Fogarty Terry Childers Property Classification:Residential - Non-Homestead 2019 EMV:598,100 2018 EMV:549,800 2017 EMV:508,500 Last Sale:11/1/1998 - 176,500 - Estate Deed - 03 Lot Size:10,874 Sq.Ft. / .25 Acres Zoning:R1 Dwelling Type:Single Family Style:One Level/Rambler Bedrooms:4 Baths:3 Actual Year Built:1920 Gross Building Area:2,112 Basement Area:1,596 Bsmt Finished %:75 Garage #1:2 Car Detached Garage #2:None 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 25 Additional Subject Photos Front View'18 Rear View'18 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 26 Sales Comparables Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3Item PID 0702824340038 0702824240078 0702824240095 0702824320140 Address 4412 44th St W 4819 40th St W 4115 Quentin Ave S 4206 Salem Ave S Weight 67 Neighborhood 0028 0027 0027 0028 District 14 13 13 14 Sale Price $176,500 $605,000 $662,000 $519,900 Sale Date 11/01/1998 08/23/2018 07/06/2018 03/19/2018 Cash Equivalent $510,000 Year / Version 2019 / 1 2019 / 1 2019 / 1 2018 / 1 Price Per Sq. Ft.$83.57 $344.53 $380.46 $376.66 Dwelling Type Single Family Single Family Single Family Single Family Style One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler Property Area 10,874 6,202 9,030 8,224 Actual Age 1920 1942 1955 1946 Effective Age 2000 2010 2012 1985 Quality Class B06 B06 B06 B07 1st Floor Area 2,112 1,756 1,740 1,354 Total GBA 2,112 1,756 1,740 1,354 Finished Area 3,309 2,458 2,652 2,437 Basement Area 1,596 1,756 1,013 1,354 Basement Finished (%) 75%40%90%80% 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms 4 4 4 4 Total Bathrooms 3 3 3 2 Garage 1 Floor Area 576 892 440 484 Garage 1 # of Cars 2 3 2 2 Garage 1 Placement Detached Tuck Under Attached Detached Total # of Cars 2 3 2 2 Walkout Type Egress Standard Walkout Air Conditioning Central Central Central Central Pool Area-Total Fireplaces 3 1 1 Deck Area-Total 200 377 Porches 130 143 Dormer Length River Lake Influences 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 27 Sales Comparables Item Comparable 4Subject PID 0702824340038 0702824330069 Address 4412 44th St W 4300 Browndale Ave Weight 64 Neighborhood 0028 0028 District 14 14 Sale Price $176,500 $640,000 Sale Date 11/01/1998 02/28/2019 Cash Equivalent Year / Version 2019 / 1 2019 / 1 Price Per Sq. Ft.$83.57 $380.50 Dwelling Type Single Family Single Family Style One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler Property Area 10,874 11,060 Actual Age 1920 1965 Effective Age 2000 2000 Quality Class B06 B05 1st Floor Area 2,112 1,682 Total GBA 2,112 1,682 Finished Area 3,309 2,592 Basement Area 1,596 1,070 Basement Finished (%) 75%85% 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms 4 5 Total Bathrooms 3 3 Garage 1 Floor Area 576 600 Garage 1 # of Cars 2 2 Garage 1 Placement Detached Attached Total # of Cars 2 2 Walkout Type Egress Air Conditioning Central Central Pool Area-Total Fireplaces 3 1 Deck Area-Total Porches 130 Dormer Length River Lake Influences 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 28 Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 29 Sales Comparables Comparable 4 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 30 Subject4412 44th St W Comparable 44300 Browndale Ave S Comparable 34206 Salem Ave S Comparable 24115 Quentin Ave S Comparable 14819 40th St WHIGHWAY 100 SHIGHWAY 100 SLYNN AVE SLYNN AVE SMMOORRNNIINNGGSSIIDDEE RRDDQQUUEENNTTIINNA A V V EE SS PRINCETON AVE SPRINCETON AVE SEXCELSIOR BLVDEXCELSIOR BLVD W O O D D A L E A V E W O O D D A L E A V EPPAARRKKCCEENNTTEERRBBLLVVDDEXCELSIOR BLVDEXCELSIOR BLVD4411SSTTSSTTWW COOLIDGE AVE SCOOLIDGE AVE S41ST ST W41ST ST W BBRROOWWNNDDAALLEEAAVVEESSBROOK AVE SBROOK AVE SMMAACCKKEEYYAAVVEESSUTICA AVE SUTICA AVE S42ND ST W42ND ST W 4400TTHH SSTT WW 42 1/2 ST W42 1/2 ST W 43 1/2 ST W43 1/2 ST W 42ND ST W42ND ST W EXCELSIOR BLVDEXCELSIOR BLVDBBRROOWWNNDDAALLEEAAVVEESSHHI I GGHHWWAAYY110000SSOTTAWA AVE SOTTAWA AVE S42ND ST W42ND ST W PP RR II NNCC EE TT OONNAAVVEESSVALLACHER AVEVALLACHER AVENATCHEZ AVE SNATCHEZ AVE S39TH ST W39TH ST W 4422NNDDSS TT WW HHI I GGHHWWAAYY110000SS44TH ST W44TH ST W VERMONT STVERMONT ST QUENTIN AVE SQUENTIN AVE SR A L E IG H A V E S R A L E IG H A V E S S A L EM A V E S S A L EM A V E S MONTEREY AVE SMONTEREY AVE SR A L E I G H A V E S R A L E I G H A V E S OOTTTTAAWWAAAAVVEESSDART AV E SDART AV E SVERNON AVE SVERNON AVE SOTTAWA AVE SOTTAWA AVE STOLEDO AVE STOLEDO AVE SSALEM AVE SSALEM AVE SWEBSTER AVE SWEBSTER AVE SWEBSTER AVE SWEBSTER AVE SNNBBHHWWYY110000SSTTOOEEXXCCEELLSSIIOORRBBLLVVDD40TH LN W40TH LN W 500 Feet Comparables for4412 44th St W Subject Comparable Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 31 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Esakakondo Lohese & Ashuema Lokenye 2628 Vernon Ave S 09-117-21-31-0081 2019 Assessed Value: $266,200 Recommendation: $230,000 This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 32 City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Esakakondo Lohese & Ashuema Lokenye Property Owner(s): 2628 Vernon Ave S Property Address: 09-117-21-31-0081PID #: Market Value $266,200Assessment Year 2019 $237,100Assessment Year 2018 $215,600Assessment Year 2017 Sale:November 1, 1997 - 76,000 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: $230,000 Appraiser: MH March 11, 2019 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject property is located at 2628 Vernon Ave South in the Birchwood neighborhood. The home is a one story dwelling that was built in 1997. The main floor has 3 bedrooms and 1 bath and is in average condition with no major updates. The basement has 1 bedroom with no baths. The basement is in fair condition with foundation issues. This property has no garage. Three comparables were selected as the best indicator of value for the subject property. The comparables are located in the same competitive market area as the subject. Comparables 2 and 3 are superior to the subject in interior quality, condition and finishes. Comparable sales 2 and 3 have garages, comparable 2 a single car and comparable 3 a two car. The most weight is placed on comparable 1 as it shares similar characteristics to the subject in terms quality/condition and overall market appeal. Based on the market data in this report, the recommendation is to adjust the 2019 assessed value to $230,000. 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Esakakondo Lohese & Ashuema Lokenye Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 33 Subject Data Summary PID #:09-117-21-31-0081 Property Address:2628 Vernon Ave S St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Multiple Address:No Lot/Block:008/001 Addition:Birch-Woods Legal(120): Owner(s): Property Classification:Residential - Homestead 2019 EMV:266,200 2018 EMV:237,100 2017 EMV:215,600 Last Sale:11/1/1997 - 76,000 - Warranty Deed - 01 Lot Size:4,952 Sq.Ft. / .11 Acres Zoning:R1 Dwelling Type:Single Family Style:One Level/Rambler Bedrooms:4 Baths:1 Actual Year Built:1997 Gross Building Area:1,008 Basement Area:1,008 Bsmt Finished %:20 Garage #1:None Garage #2:None 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Esakakondo Lohese & Ashuema Lokenye Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 34 Additional Subject Photos Front View Kitchen 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Esakakondo Lohese & Ashuema Lokenye Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 35 Additional Subject Photos Bath Water damage in bsmt 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Esakakondo Lohese & Ashuema Lokenye Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 36 Sales Comparables Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3Item PID 0911721310081 0911721340138 0911721340188 3102924320037 Address 2628 Vernon Ave S 2828 Vernon Ave S 2960 Zarthan Ave S 2758 Utica Ave S Neighborhood 0021 0021 0021 0021 District 10 10 10 11 Sale Price $76,000 $240,000 $250,000 $259,400 Sale Date 11/01/1997 11/03/2017 10/27/2017 03/07/2018 Cash Equivalent $251,618 Year / Version 2019 / 1 2018 / 1 2018 / 1 2018 / 1 Price Per Sq. Ft.$75.40 $210.53 $233.21 $263.75 Dwelling Type Single Family Single Family Single Family Single Family Style One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler Property Area 4,952 7,677 5,976 8,580 Actual Age 1997 1949 1948 1940 Effective Age 1997 1965 1998 1970 Quality Class B08 B08 B08 B08 1st Floor Area 1,008 1,140 1,072 954 Total GBA 1,008 1,140 1,072 954 Finished Area 1,210 1,425 1,881 1,431 Basement Area 1,008 1,140 952 954 Basement Finished (%) 20%25%85%50% 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms 4 2 2 3 Total Bathrooms 1 1 2 2 Garage 1 Floor Area 240 320 528 Garage 1 # of Cars 1 1 2 Garage 1 Placement Attached Attached Detached Total # of Cars 1 1 2 Walkout Type Air Conditioning Central Central Central No Pool Area-Total Fireplaces Deck Area-Total 216 Porches 96 120 120 Dormer Length River Lake Influences Thru Street Highway/Freeway 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Esakakondo Lohese & Ashuema Lokenye Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 37 Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Esakakondo Lohese & Ashuema Lokenye Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 38 Subject2628 Vernon Ave S Comparable 32757 Utica Ave S Comparable 12828 Vernon Ave S Comparable 22960 Zarthan Ave S MINNETONKA BLVDMINNETONKA BLVD XENWOOD AVE SXENWOOD AVE SWEBSTER AVE SWEBSTER AVE SVERNON AVE SVERNON AVE SZARTHAN AVE SZARTHAN AVE S27TH ST W27TH ST W 28TH ST W28TH ST W 29TH ST W29TH ST W HIGHWAY 100 SHIGHWAY 100 SMINNETONKA BLVDMINNETONKA BLVDMINNETONKA BLVDMINNETONKA BLVD 29TH ST W29TH ST WALABAMA AVE SALABAMA AVE S28TH ST W28TH ST W UTICA AVE SUTICA AVE S26TH ST W26TH ST W 26TH ST W26TH ST W 28TH ST W28TH ST W ALABAMA AVE SALABAMA AVE SHHIIGGHHWWAAYY110000SSHHIIGGHHWWAAYY110000SSALLEYALLEYHIGHWAY 100 SHIGHWAY 100 SYOSEMITE AVE SYOSEMITE AVE SYOSEMITE AVE SYOSEMITE AVE SZARTHAN AVE SZARTHAN AVE SSSBBHHWWYY110000SSTTOOMMIINNNNEETTOONNKKAABBLLVVDDComparables for2628 Vernon Ave S Subject Comparable 300 Feet Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 39 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Eli M. Temkin Emma Temkin 2730 Ottawa Ave S 31-029-24-31-0105 2019 Assessed Value: $533,500 Recommendation: $533,500 This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 40 City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Eli & Emma Temkin Eli M. TemkinProperty Owner(s): Emma Temkin 2730 Ottawa Ave S Property Address: 31-029-24-31-0105PID #: Market Value $533,500Assessment Year 2019 $514,000Assessment Year 2018 $420,400Assessment Year 2017 Sale:July 14, 2017 - 521,000 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: $533,500 Appraiser: JJ March 20, 2019 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject property is located at 2730 Ottawa Avenue South in the Fern Hill neighborhood. The home is a single family two-story dwelling that has been well maintained and in good condition. In recent years, the subject property underwent significant renovations and updates. These improvements include, but are not limited to; newly designed and professionally built exterior front porch, fiber-cement siding, Marvin windows, and a new concrete driveway. The updated kitchen features granite counter tops, stone-tile backsplash, with higher-end stainless steel appliances. The main level features hardwood flooring, custom built-in cabinetry/entertainment center, crown molding with recessed lighting throughout. The family room provides access to a large deck overlooking the professionally landscaped yard that is surrounded by a privacy fence. The upper level has similar quality features as the main level. The upper level bathroom was recently remodeled and features a new vanity, new lighting and plumbing fixtures, with ceramic tile flooring that is complimented with a subway tile surround. The subject property was recently purchased by the current owner in July of 2017 for $521,000. Property was on the open market for less than 20 days. There are five (5) primary comparable sales selected as the best indicator of value for the 2019 assessment. All comparable sales are located within the subject’s competitive market area. Adjustments have been applied based on differences in amenities and/or physical characteristics. These adjustments are market extracted based on paired sales analysis and are considered to be accurate and realistic. 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 41 Comparable sale 1, 2 and 3 are considered the best indicators of market value as they share similar characteristics to the subject in terms of quality/condition, size, design/style, and overall market appeal. Comparable 4 and 5 were added as additional support and to help bracket the many features the subject property exhibits. Based on the market data in this report, and supported by the recent purchase of the subject property, the appraiser’s recommendation is to sustain the 2019 Assessed value at $533,500. 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 42 Subject Data Summary PID #:31-029-24-31-0105 Property Address:2730 Ottawa Ave S St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Multiple Address:No Lot/Block:003/002 Addition:Woodridge Legal(120): Owner(s):Eli M Temkin Emma Temkin Property Classification:Residential - Homestead 2019 EMV:533,500 2018 EMV:514,000 2017 EMV:420,400 Last Sale:7/14/2017 - 521,000 - Warranty Deed - 01 Lot Size:10,940 Sq.Ft. / .25 Acres Zoning:R1 Dwelling Type:Single Family Style:Two Story Bedrooms:3 Baths:2 Actual Year Built:1947 Gross Building Area:2,194 Basement Area:836 Bsmt Finished %: Garage #1:1 Car Attached Garage #2:None 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 43 Additional Subject Photos Front View 2019 Living Room 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 44 Additional Subject Photos Dining Room Family Room 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 45 Additional Subject Photos Kitchen Photo 1 Kitchen Photo 2 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 46 Additional Subject Photos Dining Room Photo1 Dining Room Photo2 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 47 Additional Subject Photos Laundry Office/Den 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 48 Additional Subject Photos Main Level Bath (Half) Upper Level Bedroom 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 49 Additional Subject Photos Upper Level Bathroom (Full) Master Bedroom 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 50 Additional Subject Photos Upper Level Bedroom Utilities 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 51 Sales Comparables Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3Item PID 3102924310105 3102924410083 3102924440101 3102924410104 Address 2730 Ottawa Ave S 2620 Huntington Ave S 2851 Huntington Ave S 2607 Inglewood Ave S Weight 80 88 Neighborhood 0023 0023 0023 0023 District 11 11 12 11 Sale Price $521,000 $550,000 $575,000 $580,000 Sale Date 07/14/2017 10/19/2017 09/25/2018 02/02/2018 Cash Equivalent $540,000 $563,000 Year / Version 2019 / 1 2018 / 1 2019 / 1 2018 / 1 Price Per Sq. Ft.$237.47 $246.91 $249.89 $319.38 Dwelling Type Single Family Single Family Single Family Single Family Style Two Story 1 3/4 Two Story Two Story Property Area 10,940 8,400 8,661 8,400 Actual Age 1947 1937 1939 1938 Effective Age 1992 1989 1992 2000 Quality Class B06 B06 B05 B05 1st Floor Area 1,334 1,327 1,218 960 Total GBA 2,194 2,187 2,253 1,816 Finished Area 2,194 2,485 2,682 2,287 Basement Area 836 663 858 856 Basement Finished (%)45%50%55% 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms 3 4 4 3 Total Bathrooms 2 3 3 3 Garage 1 Floor Area 240 384 360 220 Garage 1 # of Cars 1 1 2 1 Garage 1 Placement Attached Attached Detached Attached Total # of Cars 1 1 2 1 Walkout Type Air Conditioning Central Central Central Central Pool Area-Total Fireplaces 2 1 2 2 Deck Area-Total 272 220 Porches 222 180 Dormer Length 9 River Lake Influences 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 52 Sales Comparables Item Comparable 5Comparable 4Subject PID 3102924310105 3102924340071 3102924410128 Address 2730 Ottawa Ave S 2900 Natchez Ave S 2641 Joppa Ave S Weight 75 Neighborhood 0023 0023 0023 District 11 12 11 Sale Price $521,000 $540,000 $536,000 Sale Date 07/14/2017 06/12/2017 03/15/2019 Cash Equivalent $537,000 Year / Version 2019 / 1 2018 / 1 2019 / 1 Price Per Sq. Ft.$237.47 $296.69 $341.84 Dwelling Type Single Family Single Family Single Family Style Two Story 1 3/4 Two Story Property Area 10,940 8,168 5,360 Actual Age 1947 1926 1947 Effective Age 1992 2000 2000 Quality Class B06 B06 B05 1st Floor Area 1,334 1,200 784 Total GBA 2,194 1,810 1,568 Finished Area 2,194 2,521 1,960 Basement Area 836 948 784 Basement Finished (%)75%50% 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms 3 4 3 Total Bathrooms 2 3 2 Garage 1 Floor Area 240 480 400 Garage 1 # of Cars 1 2 2 Garage 1 Placement Attached Attached Detached Total # of Cars 1 2 2 Walkout Type Air Conditioning Central Central Central Pool Area-Total Fireplaces 2 1 2 Deck Area-Total 272 495 Porches 222 96 117 Dormer Length River Lake Influences 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 53 Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 54 Sales Comparables Comparable 4 Comparable 5 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Eli & Emma Temkin Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 55 Subject2730 Ottawa Ave S Comparable 42900 Natches Ave S Comparable 22851 Huntington Ave S Comparable 52641 Joppa Ave S Comparable 32607 Inglewood Ave S Comparable 12620 Huntington Ave S FF R R AANNCCEEAAVVEESSMINNETONKA BLVDMINNETONKA BLVD MMIINNNNEETTOONNKKAA BBLLVV DD LYNN AVE SLYNN AVE S25TH ST W25TH ST W INGLEWOOD AVE SINGLEWOOD AVE SJOPPA AVE SJOPPA AVE SCEDAR LAKE AVECEDAR LAKE AVENNAATTCCHHEEZZAAVVEESSMONTEREY AVE SMONTEREY AVE S29TH ST W29TH ST W 28TH ST W28TH ST W 27TH ST W27TH ST W 26TH ST W26TH ST W GGLLEENNHHUURRSSTTAAVVEESS31ST ST W31ST ST W INGLEWOOD AVE SINGLEWOOD AVE S24TH ST W24TH ST W CCOOUUNNTTYYRROO AA DD 2255MONTEREY AVE SMONTEREY AVE SSERVICE DR HIGHWAY 7SERVICE DR HIGHWAY 7JOPPA AVE SJOPPA AVE SOTTAWA AVE SOTTAWA AVE SSSUUNNSSEETT BBLLVVDD SSEERR VV IICCEEDD RR HH IIGG HH WW AA YY 77 27TH ST W27TH ST W NATCHEZ AVE SNATCHEZ AVE SCOUNTY ROAD 25COUNTY ROAD 25BB AA SS SS WW OO OO DD RRDD 31ST ST W31ST ST W MM OONNTTEERREEYYCCTTCEDAR STCEDAR STKIPLING AVE SKIPLING AVE SJOPPA AVE SJOPPA AVE SHUNTINGTON AVE SHUNTINGTON AVE SLYNN AVE SLYNN AVE S2255TTHH SSTT WW GLENHURST PLGLENHURST PLLYNN AVE SLYNN AVE SPRINCETON AVE SPRINCETON AVE SQUENTIN AVE SQUENTIN AVE SMMOONNTTEERREEYYPPKKWWYYCEDARWOOD RDCEDARWOOD RD 500 Feet Comparables for2730 Ottawa Ave S Subject Comparable Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 56 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Joseph S. Dobrin Liora D. Dobrin 2512 Quentin Ct 31-029-24-24-0026 2019 Assessed Value: $377,300 Recommendation: Sustain This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 57 City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Liora D. DobrinProperty Owner(s): Joseph S. Dobrin 2512 Quentin Ct Property Address: 31-029-24-24-0026PID #: Market Value $377,300Assessment Year 2019 $359,100Assessment Year 2018 $326,500Assessment Year 2017 Sale:October 31, 2017 - 371,792 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: Sustain Appraiser: LC April 1, 2019 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject property is located at 2512 Quentin Ct in the Fern Hill neighborhood. The home is a townhome dwelling that is currently classified as homestead. The owners purchased on October 31, 2017 for $371,792. This was an open market sale,81 days on the market. The home has been well maintained and is in good condition. The home features a two story foyer with tile flooring,wood burning fireplace,granite kitchen counter tops and a large deck. Three bedrooms and a full bath on the second level. The lower level features a walkout and an additional ¾ bathroom with a dry sauna. There are three (3) comparable sales selected as the best indicator of value for the 2019 assessment. All comparable sales are located within the subject’s competitive market area. Adjustments have been applied based on differences in amenities and/or physical characteristics. These adjustments are market extracted based on paired sales analysis. The comparables selected are considered good indicators of market value,in conjunction with the subjects’ recent purchase,as they share similar characteristics to the subject in terms of quality/condition,size,design/style and overall market appeal. Based on the market data in this report, the appraiser’s recommendation is to sustain the 2019 Assessed value at $377,300. 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 58 Subject Data Summary PID #:31-029-24-24-0026 Property Address:2512 Quentin Ct St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Multiple Address:No Lot/Block:000/000 Addition:Condominium No 548 Princeton Court Townhomes, A Condominium Legal(120):UNIT NO 2512 Q Owner(s):Liora D Dobrin Joseph S Dobrin Property Classification:Townhouse - Homestead 2019 EMV:377,300 2018 EMV:359,100 2017 EMV:326,500 Last Sale:10/31/2017 - 371,792 - Warranty Deed - 01 Lot Size:70,637 Sq.Ft. / 1.62 Acres Zoning: Dwelling Type:Townhome Style:Two Story Bedrooms:4 Baths:3 Actual Year Built:1987 Gross Building Area:1,787 Basement Area:670 Bsmt Finished %:80 Garage #1:2 Car Tuck Under Garage #2:None 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 59 Additional Subject Photos Front View '19 Rear View'19 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 60 Sales Comparables Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3Item PID 3102924240026 3102924430099 3102924430102 3102924240029 Address 2512 Quentin Ct 2938 Monterey Ave S 2932 Monterey Ave S 2517 Quentin Ct Weight 65 70 101 Neighborhood 0044 0023 0023 0023 District QC MP MP QC Sale Price $371,792 $375,000 $436,000 $495,000 Sale Date 10/31/2017 12/08/2017 01/24/2019 08/15/2018 Cash Equivalent Year / Version 2019 / 1 2018 / 1 2019 / 1 2019 / 1 Price Per Sq. Ft.$208.05 $170.45 $198.18 $277.00 Dwelling Type Townhome Townhome Townhome Townhome Style Two Story Two Story Two Story Two Story Property Area 70,637 2,208 2,167 70,637 Actual Age 1987 1988 1989 1987 Effective Age 1987 1988 1989 1987 Quality Class B07 B05 B05 B07 1st Floor Area 894 1,100 1,100 893 Total GBA 1,787 2,200 2,200 1,787 Finished Area 2,323 2,668 2,668 2,290 Basement Area 670 720 720 670 Basement Finished (%) 80%65%65%75% 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms 4 2 4 4 Total Bathrooms 3 4 3 4 Garage 1 Floor Area 410 380 380 410 Garage 1 # of Cars 2 2 2 2 Garage 1 Placement Tuck Under Tuck Under Tuck Under Tuck Under Total # of Cars 2 2 2 2 Walkout Type Standard Walkout Standard Walkout Standard Walkout Standard Walkout Air Conditioning Central Central Central Central Pool Area-Total Fireplaces 1 1 1 1 Deck Area-Total 216 140 80 140 Porches 140 80 140 Dormer Length River Lake Influences 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 61 Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 62 Subject2512 Quentin Ct Comparable 32517 Quentin Ct Comparable 22932 Monterey Ave S Comparable 12938 Monterey Ave S MINNETONKA BLVDMINNETONKA BLVD NNAATTCCHHEEZZAAVVEESS2255TTHHSSTTWW MONTEREY AVE SMONTEREY AVE S29TH ST W29TH ST W 26TH ST W26TH ST W 28TH ST W28TH ST W 27TH ST W27TH ST W OTTAWA AVE SOTTAWA AVE SNATCHEZ AVE SNATCHEZ AVE SBARRY STBARRY ST OOTTTTAAWW AA PP LL 27TH ST W27TH ST WHIGHWAY 100 SHIGHWAY 100 SLYNN AVE SLYNN AVE SSALEM AVE SSALEM AVE SPRINCETON AVE SPRINCETON AVE SRALEIGH AVE SRALEIGH AVE SQUENTIN AVE SQUENTIN AVE SMMOONNTTEERREEYYPPKKWWYYComparables for2512 Quentin Ct Subject Comparable 350 Feet Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 63 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Owner's Representative-Charlie Young MMP (Minneapolis West PT) Propco., LLC 1400 Zarthan Ave S 04-117-21-32-0089 2019 Assessed Value: $7,420,000 Recommendation: Sustain This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 64 City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Owner's Representative-Charlie Young MMP (Minneapolis West PT) Propco., LLCProperty Owner(s): 1400 Zarthan Ave S Property Address: 04-117-21-32-0089PID #: Market Value $7,420,000Assessment Year 2019 $6,307,000Assessment Year 2018 $6,890,000Assessment Year 2017 Sale:February 5, 2016 - 10,134,213 (04 - Limited Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: Sustain Appraiser: BN March 27, 2019 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject property is a 106 room, limited-service, upper mid-scale hotel. The unit mix consists of 85 - studio style units and 21- 2 bedroom units all with kitchenettes. The hotel has been well maintained with a number of the units being remodeled in 2017. Common area ammenties include and outdoor pool and laundry facilities for the guests. An income analysis was done for the subject property based on the Rushmore Methodolgy of valuing hotel properties. This has been the approach recognized by the Minnesota Tax Court. Due to Minnesota hosting the Super Bowl in 2018, hotels saw an uptick in occupancy. While the subject property's 2018 income would support a value higher than the assessed value we recognize that this was an anomaly. Valuation review has therefore weighted the 2017 and 2018 income stream which fully supports the value of record being toward the bottom portion of a market range. We therefore recoomend no change. 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Owner's Representative-Charlie Young Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 65 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Owner's Representative-Tom Sanders 36 Park LLC 3601 Park Center Blvd 06-028-24-33-0019 2019 Assessed Value: $47,040,000 Recommendation: Sustain This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 66 City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Owner's Representative-Tom Sanders 36 Park LLCProperty Owner(s): 3601 Park Center Blvd Property Address: 06-028-24-33-0019PID #: Market Value $47,040,000Assessment Year 2019 $44,160,000Assessment Year 2018 $42,240,000Assessment Year 2017 Sale:October 21, 2011 - 3,000,000 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: Sustain Appraiser: BN April 2, 2019 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject is a Class A, 192 unit apartment building. Construction of the property began in 2012 and was completed in 2013. The building is considered to be in excellent condition. Ownership has claimed the subject property has operated at below market norm occupancy since opening. As of our inspection, the property manager reported occupancy at 95.85% which, while still slightly below current market norms, is considered stable. A review of the subject's trailing income and expense figures confirm the assessed valuation is warranted. Adjusting the vacancy and collection loss of the subject to market norms confirms that the subject's assessed valuation does not need to be adjusted. Class A apartment buildings in Hennepin County were analyzed. Two Class A apartment complexes sold in St. Louis Park in the last two years. In January 2018 both the Millennium and the Ellipse/E2 sold for $258,703 and $275,345 per unit respectively. Based on analytics performed by the CoStar Group, the average sale price per unit for Class A multi-family properties in the Twin Cities metro area is at $267,000/unit and $272,000/unit in the St. Louis Park/Hopkins market. The subject's 2019 assessed value per units is $245,000. Vacancy rates have dropped to all-time lows despite the addition of new units in the last five to six years. Even with the addition of new units Class A properties have seen rent gains between 2% to 3% as demand has been keeping up with supply. The petitioner has requested to forgo appearing at the Local Board of Equalization and has only asked to be on this Board roster in order to pursue his appeal at the County Board. No change in valuation is recommended. 2019 Board of Appeal and Equalization Owner's Representative-Tom Sanders Reconvene Meeting of April 22, 2019 Title: 2019 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 67 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 22, 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 regularly scheduled study session on May 13, 2019. Policy consideration: Not applicable. Summary: This report summarizes the proposed agenda for the regularly scheduled study session on May 13, 2019. Also attached to this report is: - Study session discussion topics and timeline Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Tentative agenda – May 13, 2019 Study session discussion topics and timeline Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant Reviewed by: Maria Carrillo Perez, Management Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Title: Future study session agenda planning May 13, 2019. 6:00 p.m. Study session – Community room Tentative discussion items 1. Future study session agenda planning – Administrative services (5 minutes) 2. Budget 2020 – Administrative services (180 minutes) Staff has started the 2020 budget and capital planning process. To assist this work staff proposes an in-depth conversation about the 2020 budget/capital plan, and obtain policy direction on the council’s expectations. 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 3. Mixed use – density bonus 4. PLACE update 5. Housing activity Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 1) Page 3 Title: Future study session agenda planning Study session discussion topics and timeline Discussion topic Comments Date Scheduled Ordinance regarding home occupations (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 1st reading May 6, 2019 C-1 zoning district retail and service use restrictions Discussed on 6/11/18; referred to PC. Discussed 11/26/18; SS report 2/25/19; Discussed 3/11/19 – further discussion requested by council May 28, 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 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 Accessory dwelling units/home-based businesses June, 2019 Election holiday discussion 3rd Qtr. 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 discussed on 3/25/2019 TBD; Pending workgroup recommendation Discuss and evaluate our public process TBD Easy access to nature, across city, starting with low-income neighborhoods TBD Zoning guidelines for transparency requirements Discussed 7/9/18. Referred to PC for review & recommendation. Referred back to the Planning Commission TBD: referred to planning commission 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 Discuss Council Norms Reviewed on 5/7/18; adoption postponed on 5/21/18. Discussed at Jan. Retreat; discussed on 3/18/19 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 22, 2019 Discussion item: 2 Executive summary Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Recommended action: None at this time. The development team will present the site plan, discuss its proposed development program, and ask for feedback from the city council. Policy consideration: •Is the city council generally supportive of the redevelopment concept? •Is the city council willing to consider a land use change and rezoning for the properties? •Is the city council willing to allow renovated buildings to count toward the one-to-one NOAH replacement requirement? •Is the EDA willing to explore using tax increment financing for this proposal? Summary: Sela Group, LLC, the developer of Parkway 25, has acquired 12 properties along 31st Street to develop Parkway Commons, a proposed development of 191 new residential multi- family apartment units in three buildings. The proposed development would also include the rehabilitation of two existing apartment buildings (6 and 8 units). As currently proposed, the project area encompasses 55 naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) units that exist on the site today. The developer is proposing to demolish 41 of the NOAH units and renovate the remaining 14 NOAH units, keeping those rents affordable. Under the city’s inclusionary housing policy, the developer would be required to replace all existing NOAH units that are demolished or otherwise removed (no longer affordable) due to the project. The developer is requesting a change from that requirement to reduce the number of new affordable units in the proposed project from 55 to 41, in consideration for keeping the 14 renovated units as affordable (more details in the attached discussion). The developer owns many other NOAH properties in St. Louis Park and is also proposing to assist existing tenants in relocating to other apartments he owns within the city, or elsewhere. The developer would find similar apartments with similar rents, and would provide financial assistance for relocation costs. A number of city council approvals would be required for the construction of this development: a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide portions of the site from medium-density residential to high-density residential; preliminary and final plat approval; an alley vacation; and a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development. The development also requires an Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Financial or budget considerations: The developer has indicated there are extraordinary costs associated with the proposed redevelopment site and building and will request tax increment financing. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion; Site plan & renderings; Proposed land use map & proposed zoning map Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner Karen Barton, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Discussion Site information: The proposed redevelopment site is located along W. 31st Street and Highway 7 Service Road, between Glenhurst Ave. and Inglewood Ave. The site is located in the Triangle neighborhood near the southwest quadrant of CSAH 25 and France Ave, adjacent to Parkway 25 and The Shoreham. Site area: 2.5 acres Current uses: Commercial, single family, duplex, and multi-family residential uses 2040 Comprehensive Plan: TOD – Transit Oriented Development RM – Medium Density Residential Current zoning: C-2, General Commercial R4, Multi-family Residential Proposed zoning: PUD - Planned Unit Development Surrounding land uses: North: Multi-family residential and right-of-way East: 3 single-family rentals & multi-family residential West: 3 single-family homes & multi-family residential South: Multi-family residential Background: In 2016, the city approved a Planned Unit Development for Sela to construct Parkway 25, a 112 unit mixed-use building with 12,000 square feet of commercial space along Hwy 7 Frontage Rd. Since 2016, Sela Group, LLC has acquired 12 additional properties in the area to create the proposed Parkway Commons development site. The property acquisitions include a mix of commercial, single family, duplex, and multi-family residential buildings, which include a total of an estimated 55 units that are considered naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH). NOAH units are defined as units affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% area medium income. Parkway Commons is a proposed four-phase, 191 unit, multi-family residential apartment development, and includes the rehabilitation of two existing NOAH multi-family apartment buildings. Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Land use, zoning, plat, and vacation request: The developer intends to apply for a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide portions of the site from medium density (MD) residential to high density (HD) residential. Medium density residential allows net residential densities from six to 30 units per acre. High density residential allows a residential density range of 30 to 75 units per acre. A portion of the site was reguided to TOD – Transit Oriented Development in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. TOD designation allows a range of residential densities from 50 to 124 units per acre. As of April 2019, a change in land use requires the developer adhere to the city’s inclusionary housing policy. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW): Based on the requirements from the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB), the city will need to complete an EAW process. An EAW is a brief document designed to lay out the basic facts of a project to determine if an Environmental Impact Statement is required. Parkway Commons requires an EAW because several parcels require a land use change. Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 4 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Building Existing Land Use Proposed Land Use Proposed Units Proposed Density Proposed Zoning Proposed Stories Year Build/reh abbed 1 MD HD 94 72 un/ac PUD 4 stories 2019-20 2 MD HD 41 70 un/ac PUD 4 stories 2021 3 TOD TOD 42 70 un/ac PUD 7 stories 2023-24 5a* MD HD 8 29 un/ac PUD 2 stories 2019-20 5b* MD HD 6 24 un/ac PUD 3 stories 2019-20 *Buildings 5a and 5b are existing NOAH buildings that will be renovated The developer will request a rezoning from C-2, General Commercial and R-4, Multiple-Family Residential to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). A PUD will offer flexibility to facilitate a more cohesive and innovative site and building design. Additionally, the development will require preliminary and final plat approval, and the vacation of alley right-of-way. Per the PUD ordinance and a tax increment financing (TIF) request, the developer will be required to meet the city’s the green building policy. Inclusionary housing policy: The city’s inclusionary housing policy was updated on April 15, 2019 to require the greater of either a one-for-one replacement of all NOAH units removed in conjunction with a project, or inclusion of a required percentage of new affordable units within the project. There are estimated to be 55 existing NOAH units in the proposed development, which is greater than the maximum 20% of the 191 new construction units required under the inclusionary policy (38). The developer is proposing to demolish approximately 41 existing NOAH units, and rehab and maintain affordable rents for another 14 existing NOAH units as part of the development. The developer is requesting to count the 14 rehabbed affordable units as an off-set to the 41 NOAH units being demolished. Thus, under the developer’s proposal, the developer would only be required to construct an additional 27 new affordable units (41-14=27). This would result in a total of 41 affordable units in the project, as opposed to the 55 required under the inclusionary housing policy. The developer has also indicated a willingness to assist current tenants of the existing NOAH units in the proposed project to relocate to one of the many another affordable housing units that he owns in St. Louis Park. The developer would find similar apartments with similar rents, and would provide financial assistance for relocation costs. Building Proposed Units Existing NOAH 1 94 29 2 41 12 3 42 0 5a* 8 8 5b* 6 6 *Buildings 5a and 5b are existing NOAH buildings that will be renovated Site and building design: The buildings are designed to take advantage of the topography throughout the site and to facilitate shared parking opportunities. Buildings 1 and 2 are four- Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 5 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal story, multi-family, residential buildings, with the fourth story stepped back to reduce the building’s visual impact along 31st Street. Building 3 is a seven-story residential building. The developer anticipates phased construction of the development, with buildings 1, 5a and 5b starting in 2019, building 2 in 2021, and building 3 in 2023-2024. The development adds greenspace and additional pedestrian access through the neighborhood. To accomplish this, the developer proposes narrowing 31st Street to provide on-street parking, stormwater mitigation, and areas for additional landscaping. All ground level residential units in buildings 1, 2, and 3 will have patios with a connection to the adjacent sidewalk. A new sidewalk is included between Parkway 25 and building 1 to give the ground floor units on the north side of Building 1 pedestrian access as well. Unit type: The development includes 1 studio, 49 1-bed/1bath, 33 1-bed+den/1bath, 35 2- bed/2bath, and 39 2-bed+den/2bath, for a total of 191 units. Building Studio 1 Bed/ 1 Bath 1 Bed+/ 1 Bath 2 Bed/ 2 Bath 2 Bed+/ 2 Bath Total Units 1 0 18 16 0 16 94 2 0 21 17 0 3 41 3 0 4 0 18 20 42 5a* 1 4 0 3 0 8 5b* 0 2 0 4 0 6 Total 1 49 33 25 39 191 Amenities: All buildings will have a community room. Building 1 will also include a pool, business center, fitness center, and roof deck. These amenities will be shared with Building 2. Building 3 will have shared access to the amenities at Parkway 25. Materials: All buildings are designed to reflect a similar exterior aesthetic as Parkway 25. Exterior materials will include brick, stone, metal panels, and wood-look metal panels. The materials will reflect the color and variation found on Parkway 25, but each building will be unique with their own forms and geometries. Buildings 5a and 5b will be renovated and will remain in their current layouts. Improvements will include landscaping, new paint, renovation of exterior materials, new roofs, and updates to the interior public spaces. Traffic: The city commissioned SRF Consulting to conduct a traffic study to determine the impacts of the proposed development on the adjacent road intersections. If mitigations are necessary to relieve impacts to the network, the study will recommend improvements. Mitigations could include a round-a-bout at 31st Street and Glenhurst Ave., and possibly a connection of France Avenue from the Hwy 7 Service Road to 31st Street. SRF Consulting is also the city’s consultant for the 2018 Connect the Park improvement plan, and completed the original traffic study for Parkway 25. Parking: Parking is provided on-street, in surface lots, and underground. Staff will be reviewing parking to ensure compliance with the zoning ordinance. Additionally, a parking study is being Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 6 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal conducted by SRF Consulting to determine if the proposed parking is sufficient to accommodate the proposed development using the ITE Parking Generation Handbook. Transit: The development site is centrally located between two Southwest LRT Stations; with Beltline Station approximately 0.4 miles to the west and Lake Street Station half a mile to the east. Frequent bus service is provided along CSAH 25 and Minnetonka Blvd via the Route 17 Metro Transit bus lines. Landscaping: The development will be required to meet the city’s landscaping ordinance including provisions for Dedicated Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA). Next steps: Sela Group, LLC intends to apply for a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide portions of the site from medium density residential to high density residential, preliminary and final plat approval, an alley vacation, and a rezoning to a Planned Unit Development. The developer also intends to request tax increment financing to defray a portion of extraordinary costs associated with the project that would prevent the project from being financially feasible. The traffic study is being finalized, and the developer will be seeking input from neighbors upon submitting formal applications. The developer and staff will schedule future study session(s) with the city council to review traffic if needed, and discuss the tax increment financing requests prior to city council consideration of formal applications. Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 7 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Site Plan and Renderings Aerial View Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 8 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Building 1 Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 9 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Building 2 Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 10 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Building 3 Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 2) Page 11 Title: Parkway Commons development proposal Proposed land use changes Proposed rezoning Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 22, 2019 Discussion item: 3 Executive summary Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Recommended action: Discuss the Environment and Sustainability Commission’s (ESC) work plan and specific requests related to the Climate Action Plan (CAP). Policy consideration: Does the city council concur with the ESC’s work plan? Summary: The ESC work plan covers four key initiatives related to the city’s Climate Action Plan (CAP): 1. Advising city council and staff on CAP and sustainability topics 2. Business engagement in the city’s Climate Action Plan 3. Resident engagement in the city’s Climate Action Plan 4. CAP tracking and support Specific details are provided in the attached 2019 ESC Work Plan. In addition, the ESC members would like to discuss the following requests that were made by the ESC at its 4-3-19 meeting: 1. Request that council stands by the Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy (EP3) they unanimously adopted in 2015, to purchase 100% renewable energy to offset energy use in municipal buildings. 2. Request council to accelerate the energy benchmark ordinance and have the ordinance in place by end of 2019. 3. Request a monthly standing study session item be discussed by council to review CAP priorities and measures, with ESC involvement. Financial or budget considerations: Staff is currently analyzing the costs of available renewable energy options, including Xcel Energy’s Windsource program. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. Supporting documents: 2019 ESC work plan 2019 ESC events Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy (EP3) Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Principal Planner Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Page 2 Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Discussion Background: Below is information related to the specific requests of the ESC: Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy (EP3); renewable energy options - Renewable Connect and Windsource; the Benchmarking Disclosure ordinance, and the request for a monthly standing council study session item to review CAP priorities and measures with the ESC. 1. Request that city purchase 100% renewable energy to offset energy use in municipal buildings. Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy (EP3) Adopted in 2015 (attached) Summary of policy: • The goal of the Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy is to encourage purchasing that reflects the City’s commitment to being an environmental and sustainability leader. • This policy has been adopted to address such environmental factors as conserving energy and natural resources, minimizing the use of water and other environmental impacts such as pollution, reducing materials that are landfilled or incinerated, reducing or eliminating toxic materials hazardous to our workers and community, supporting strong recycling markets, and creating a model that encourages other purchasers in our community to adopt similar goals. • Fiscal goals of this policy include decreasing lifecycle costs by acknowledging and incorporating full cost accounting, and minimizing waste and its associated costs. • Promoted aspects of sustainability may include, but are not limited to: local sourcing, ethical business practices, responsible treatment of workers, child labor prevention, human rights, safety and wellness, fair trade, transparency, economic equality and social justice. Renewable-Connect Subscriptions Xcel Energy’s Renewable-Connect is a renewable energy option using locally sourced dedicated wind and solar resources. The program automatically replaces the fuel surcharge on the city’s bill and is shown as a credit that partially offsets the subscription price. The city has four of its largest buildings currently enrolled in the Xcel Energy Renewable Connect program: Police Station, City Hall, Fire Station #1, and Fire Station #2. Renewable connect is an extra cost, however it achieves a reduction of 100% emissions from electricity sources for participating buildings during the life of the subscription. The current program is fully utilized and a second round of Renewable-Connect is planned for 2021. The city has a Memorandum of Understanding with Xcel to be involved in the next phase when it begins. Windsource Xcel Energy’s Windsource is a voluntary program that provides customers an option to purchase renewable energy for homes and businesses. The energy that supplies Windsource is generated locally by Xcel Energy. Participation in Windsource requires a 3- year commitment for business customers (including the city). Subscribing the remaining electricity use from city operations to Windsource would require a significant amount of funding. Additional financial analysis and cost/benefit would be Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Page 3 Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission needed to determine the exact cost of the Windsource program and would need to be budgeted for 2020. Staff would review its cost effectiveness in relation to other alternatives for improving energy efficiency before making a recommendation. If Council would like to pursue Windsource, Staff can bring back a detailed financial analysis of it for the city council to consider. 2. Benchmarking Disclosure Ordinance The Benchmarking Disclosure ordinance is a tool that requires reporting of energy usage. The Climate Action Plan (CAP) suggests the city adopt a building energy disclosure ordinance for all public buildings and all commercial buildings greater than 20,000 square feet. Benchmarking ordinances have reduced energy use and emissions between 0.5 and 3.5% in 3-5 years for cities like Minneapolis, Chicago and New York. In 2018 the city joined the Hennepin County Benchmarking Collaborative as a pilot city, along with the cities of St. Paul, Edina, and Eden Prairie. This collaborative is providing initial services for cities seeking to adopt and implement an energy benchmarking ordinance at no cost. The initial steps are to understand the circumstances within each community and embark on a process to establish roles, timeline, engagement plan, and implementation plan. Staff is working on this initiative with the selected consultants chosen by the Collaborative, including the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE), the Great Plains Institute, and Overlay Consulting and expects to present an ordinance for adoption by the city council in fourth quarter of 2019. Community engagement with businesses and affected property owners will be an important step in this work as the provisions of the ordinance need to be discussed with business and property owners. 3. Request for a monthly standing council study session item discussion by council to review CAP priorities and measures, with ESC involvement. Staff defers to the council as to whether it would want to make this commitment to the ESC and potentially other commissions. One alternative would be a council check-in with the ESC every six months with the understanding that the frequency could be increased or decreased as circumstances dictate. In addition, staff could provide updates to the council via study session reports at least quarterly, with updates given to the ESC by staff as a part of their monthly meeting. Next steps: After council discussion and at the direction of city council, staff can pursue the following: 1. Examine costs for renewable energy including Windsource. 2. Continue to work on Benchmarking Ordinance with the following schedule: a. Draft ordinance – 2nd and 3rd quarter 2019 b. Public engagement with business and property owners – 3rd quarter 2019 c. Present for adoption by city council – 4th quarter 2019 d. First compliance period – June 2020 3. Schedule check –in meetings with the ESC as directed by the council. Board and Commission Annual Workplan Approved: November 19, 2018 Updated: 1 Work Plan Template│ (Insert name of board/commission here) Time Frame Initiative Strategic Priorities Purpose (see page 2 for definitions) Outcome (fill in after completed) A.Advise City Council and Staff 1.Increase communication between council and staff and the ESC on CAP and sustainability related goals as ambassadors and advisors of the work 2.Discuss the city’s existing sustainability efforts in order to propose and encourage possible opportunity areas ☒New Initiative ☒Continued Initiative ☒Ongoing Responsibility ☐1 ☒ 2 ☐ 3 ☐4 ☐ 5 ☐N/A ☒Commission Initiated Project ☐Council Initiated Project ☐Report Findings (council requested) ☐Formal Recommendation (council requested) B.Business Engagement 1.Business Climate Champions program running a.Roots & Shoots and ESC partnership to complete front end sign-ups b.Specific actions within the program: Staff Consultant leads with ESC as an advisory group 2.Track sign ups and successes ☒New Initiative ☒Continued Initiative ☒ Ongoing Responsibility ☐1 ☒ 2 ☐ 3 ☐4 ☐ 5 ☐N/A ☒Commission Initiated Project ☐Council Initiated Project ☐Report Findings (council requested) ☐ Formal Recommendation (council requested) Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 4 Board and Commission Annual Workplan April 22, 2019 Updated: 2 City of St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities 1.St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. 2.St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. 3.St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. C.Resident Engagement 1.Create and launch “Sustainability Champions” program 2.Develop community resources to use at events, for door knocking, etc. 3.Host and/or attend events to engage with city members (ex: Home Remodeling Fair, Ecotacular, etc.) 4.Develop a plan for sharing information about the city’s existing sustainability efforts and resources that are currently available (ex: CAP, resource hub, etc.) 5.Track successes: program sign-ups, event attendance, etc. ☒New Initiative ☒Continued Initiative ☒Ongoing Responsibility ☐1 ☒ 2 ☐ 3 ☐4 ☐ 5 ☐N/A ☒Commission Initiated Project ☐Council Initiated Project ☐Report Findings (council requested) ☐Formal Recommendation (council requested) D.CAP Tracking & Support 1.CAP Resource Hub and running 2.Track progress against the CAP goals ☒New Initiative ☒Continued Initiative ☒ Ongoing Responsibility ☐1 ☒ 2 ☐ 3 ☐4 ☐ 5 ☐N/A ☒Commission Initiated Project ☒Council Initiated Project ☐Report Findings (council requested) ☐ Formal Recommendation (council requested) Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 5 Board and Commission Annual Workplan April 22, 2019 Updated: 3 4.St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. 5.St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement OR Other Purpose: definitions Modifications: Work plans may be modified, to add or delete items, in one of three ways: •Project initiated by the board or commission Commission Initiated Project •Project tasked to a board or commission by the city council Council Initiated Project •Initiated by the city council •Board and commission will study a specific issue or topic and report its findings or comments to the city council in writing •No direct action is taken by the board/commission Report Findings •Initiated by the city council •Board and commission will study a specific issue or topic and makes a formal recommendation to the city council on what action to take •A recommendation requires a majoirty of the commissioners' support Formal Recommendation Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 6 Board and Commission Annual Workplan April 22, 2019 Updated: 4 •Work plans can be modified by mutual agreement during a joint work session. •If immediate approval is important, the board or commission can work with their staff liaison to present a modified work plan for city council approval at a council meeting. •The city council can direct a change to the work plan at their discretion. Parking Lot Items that are being considered by the board/commission but not proposed in the annual work plan. Council approval is needed if the board/commission decides they would like to move forward with an initiative. Initiative Comments: 1.Request that council stands by the Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Policy (EP3) they unanimously adopted in 2015, to purchase 100% renewable energy to offset energy use in municipal buildings. Passed by the ESC on a unanimous motion on 4/3/2019. 2.Request council to accelerate the energy benchmark ordinance and have the ordinance in place by end of 2019. Passed by the ESC on a unanimous motion on 4/3/2019. 3.Request a monthly standing study session item be discussed by council to review CAP priorities and measures, with ESC involvement. Passed by the ESC on a unanimous motion on 4/3/2019. Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 7 Environment and Sustainability Events 2019 EVENT DATE LEAD Home Remodeling Fair 2-10-19 ESC Westwood Hills Nature Center Groundbreaking on Earth Day 4-22-19 City Staff Earth Day Event @ High School 4-24-19 R&S; SEEDS Bike Event 5-18-19 ESC & Bike & Walk the Park FB group ALA/Electric Vehicle & Tools Event 11am-2pm 6-8-19 ESC Parktacular/Ecotacular 6-15-19 City Staff/ESC Business/Residential Door Knock On-going Youth; R&S; iMatter Solar United Neighbors July Youth; R&S; iMatter Solar Power Hour August ESC National Night Out August ESC OTHER EVENTS Tree Planting 4-21-19 City staff Minnehaha Creek Clean up 4-27-19 City staff Arbor Day 5-11-19 City staff ESC= Environment & Sustainability Commission R&S= Roots & Shoot Environmental Club Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 8 City of St. Louis Park Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Policy Adopted 4-6-15 I. PURPOSE AND SCOPE A.The goal of this policy is to encourage purchasing that reflects the City’s commitment to being an environmental and sustainability leader. This policy may be amended or superseded in the future to also include broader aspects of sustainability. These aspects may include, but are not limited to: local sourcing, ethical business practices, responsible treatment of workers, child labor prevention, human rights, safety and wellness, fair trade, transparency, economic equality and social justice. This policy for purchasing is adopted in order to: Promote environmental factors such as: •Conserving natural resources •Conserving energy •Minimizing environmental impacts such as pollution •Minimizing use of water •Reducing or eliminating toxins or toxic materials that create hazards to workers and our community •Supporting strong recycling markets •Reducing materials that are landfilled and incinerated •Creating a model for successfully purchasing environmentally preferable products that encourages other purchasers in our community to adopt similar goals Promote fiscal factors such as: •Decreasing lifecycle costs by acknowledging and incorporating full cost accounting (purchase, maintenance, disposal, staff time, and labor) •Minimizing waste and its associated costs B.This policy applies to all City departments and employees, vendors, contractors and grantees for all products and services provided to the City. C.This policy is subject to the requirements and preferences in the Municipal Contracting Law (MN. Statue 471.345), the St. Louis Park Purchasing Policy and all other applicable laws and ordinances. D.This policy adheres to or exceeds the Admin Minnesota Materials Management Division Environmentally Responsible Purchasing Policy: http://www.mmd.admin.state.mn.us/envir.htm. All Minnesota Legislative and Executive Order Requirements in the State policy shall be followed by the City of St. Louis Park unless superseded by this city policy. II. EFFECTIVE DATE This policy will take effect on June 1, 2015. Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 9 III. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES A. Implementation All City departments are responsible for implementation of this policy and to ensure their respective employees and contractors are fully aware and supportive of the City’s policy to purchase environmentally preferable goods and services. All departments are suggested to: •Evaluate environmentally preferable products, whenever practical, to determine the extent to which they may be used by the department and its contractors. •Facilitate data collection, if requested, on purchases of designated environmentally preferable products by the department in order to assist the City Sustainability Coordinator. B. Responsible Parties The Sustainability Coordinator will administer this policy. Each department head will have the responsibility of ensuring adoption within his or her department and report any issues to the above party. C. Accountability Measures The City Sustainability Coordinator will work with all city departments to deliver a brief summary annually to Sustainable SLP, covering: •Status of this policy’s implementation •Informal data on purchases of environmentally preferable products •Financial implications of the policy, if any •Overall accomplishment and challenges •Recommendations for the future IV. GENERAL CONDITIONS A.Purchased Energy A.1. Conservation – It is recommended that lifecycle costs are considered in every new building or infrastructure project, retrofit or remodel requiring city capital. Lifecycle thinking should be employed when evaluating energy conserving purchases. For example, longer life and lower end of life impacts of LED lighting can offset initial price premium over fluorescent lighting. A ten-year payback for efficiency upgrades is a recommended standard, but could be amended based on future needs. Sample energy-saving purchases include, but are not limited to: •Energy performance contracting for existing buildings •More efficient technologies such as LED lighting for buildings and grounds •Daylight or motion sensor lighting •HVAC control systems •Passive solar heating / shading Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 10 A.2. Renewable Electricity – It is recommended that the City will make every effort to purchase renewably generated electricity in all of its accounts, when economically feasible. Renewable power can often be purchased for less than 10% incremental cost, or could even yield a payback over time. The city should seek to understand the cost of fully eliminating its electricity-derived carbon footprint and establish goals to reach net zero. Current means of becoming carbon-neutral include but are not limited to: •Participation in Xcel Energy’s Windsource program •Large-scale solar energy purchasing agreements •Small-scale ‘community solar’ projects •The purchase of carbon offsets A.3. Purchased Fossil Fuels – It is recommended that the City will make every effort to offset the environmental impacts of its purchased fossil fuels when economically feasible. The city should understand the cost of offsetting its carbon emissions originating from: 1) natural gas, 2) gasoline, 3) diesel / fuel oil. Current means of becoming carbon neutral with respect to fossil fuels include but are not limited to: •Natural gas performance contracting for existing buildings •Participation in CenterPoint Energy’s Green Balance Program •The planned purchase of higher efficiency or plug-in electric vehicle fleets •Fuel switching from natural gas to renewables for buildings and infrastructure •The purchase of carbon offsets B. Source Reduction B.1. Products that are durable, long lasting, reusable or refillable are preferred. B.2. Vendors will be encouraged whenever practicable to take back and reuse pallets and packaging materials such as plastic bags, cardboard and similar materials. B.3. City will implement the goals of the new Protocol related to the Zero Waste Meetings out of the City’s Public Works Department as they relate to purchasing whenever practicable. C. Recycled Content Products C.1. It is recommended that printing paper, office paper and paper products will minimally meet the minimum recycled content standards established by the US EPA that meets the minimum recycled content standards established by the US EPA Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines. 100% post-consumer recycled content is strongly preferred if fiscally possible (within a 10% lifecycle cost increase over the aforementioned product, for example). Any non-recycled paper content should be certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) or the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI). Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 11 C.2. It is recommended that janitorial paper products will minimally meet the minimum recycled content standards established by the US EPA and that meets the minimum recycled content standards established by the US EPA Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines. 100% post-consumer recycled content is strongly preferred if fiscally possible (within a 10% lifecycle cost increase over the aforementioned product, for example). Any non-recycled paper content should be certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) or the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI). D. Electronics D.1. The responsibility for this policy will be those City of St. Louis Park employees whose job functions include the operations management for city owned facilities (i.e., offices, garages, buildings) or purchasing of energy consuming equipment (i.e. Information Technology). These individuals are responsible for ensuring that this policy is executed and updated over time. D.2. Where applicable, energy-efficient Information Technology equipment will be purchased with the most up-to-date energy efficiency functions. When necessary, suppliers or manufacturers will train equipment operators and maintenance personnel in the proper enabling and use of energy efficient and sleep mode functions on their equipment. D.3. All appliances and products purchased by the City and for which the US EPA Energy Star certification is available will meet Energy Star certification. Typically, this would include lighting, heating, exhaust fans, water heaters, computers, exit signs, and appliances such as refrigerators, dishwashers and microwave ovens. Purchased electronic products meeting EPA Energy Star standards are highly encouraged. D.4. When Energy Star labels are not available, use energy efficient products that are in the upper 25% of energy efficiency as designated by the Federal Energy Management Program. D.5. The city will consider rechargeable battery systems for common household sizes: AA, AAA, etc. Disposable batteries will only be purchased in the event that no rechargeable option exists or if there are significant reasons why a rechargeable battery system is suboptimal. E. Water Conservation E.1. The City should purchase water-saving products whenever practicable. This includes, but is not limited to, high-performance fixtures like toilets, waterless urinals, low-flow faucets and aerators, and upgraded irrigation systems. F. Green Cleaning The Green Cleaning concept has been employed by cleaning companies for many years. These techniques have now become mainstream in many cases. The cleaning policy below contains recommendations for the future, but expectations Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 12 can be made if these are not currently practical or would require significant investment of resources. Some chemicals such as those associated with the rec center pool may be exempted from this policy. It is recommended, however, that we consider lower-toxicity alternatives to chlorine should they become available in the future and economically feasible. F.1. Green Cleaning Roles & Responsibilities The responsible party for this policy is the St. Louis Park Facilities Maintenance Supervisor. It is recommended that he or she evaluate the green cleaning policy on a quarterly basis to evaluate progress towards the implementation goals and assess whether the building (all city facilities except the Rec Center) is being sufficiently cleaned with these procedures. As necessary, the responsible party will revise the green cleaning policy to include additional cleaning strategies or modify existing cleaning strategies. F.2. Cleaning Products and Materials Cleaning products should meet one or more of the following standards: •Green Seal GS-37, Green Seal GS-40 •EPA Design for the Environment Program’s Standard for Safer Cleaning Products. •Hand soaps and hand sanitizers contain no antimicrobial agents except where required by health codes and other regulations (food service and health care requirements) and meet Green Seal GS-41. •Hand sanitizers meet UL 2783 standard for Instant Hand Antiseptics. F.3. Cleaning Contracts & Services Strategies for reducing toxicity in contracted cleaning activities: •Cleaning staff and building occupants are supplied with safe cleaning chemicals that meet the sustainability criteria described in the purchasing guidelines above. •Hard floors, including tile, concrete, and wood surfaces, are cleaned with only sustainable cleaning products. •Microfiber cloth and other sustainable high performance cleaning techniques replacing traditional cleaning activities. •Ionized water-only surface cleaning devices used as much as possible. •Cleaning chemicals must be labeled and stored in locked, demarcated areas. •Material safety data sheets (MSDS) for the cleaning chemicals are displayed in storage areas. Strategies for conserving energy, water, and chemicals used for cleaning: •Manual-powered equipment and cleaning strategies used whenever practicable to reduce the energy and water used by powered equipment and typical cleaning strategies. •Cold water used when possible to reduce energy used to heat hot water. Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 13 •Vacuum filters and other applicable equipment changed frequently to enable air flow and reduce the energy consumption of the equipment. •When cleaning chemicals are necessary, the operating procedures for chemical dilution are followed to ensure that the minimum amount of cleaning chemical is used. Training plan and tracking plan for water, energy, and toxic chemical usage: •A training plan is developed to ensure all new staff understands this policy. •Every time a toxic chemical is used at most City buildings managed by Facilities Maintenance Division, it should be reported to the St. Louis Park Facilities Maintenance Supervisor with a record of which chemical was used, where it was applied, and the reason for its use (exceptions may be granted by the City Sustainability Coordinator). At the present time, the Rec Center and Park Buildings will be exempt from this requirement. G. Waste Minimization G.1. St. Louis Park requires vendors to eliminate packaging or use the minimum amount necessary for product protection, to the greatest extent practicable. G.2. Packaging that is reusable, recyclable or compostable is preferred, when suitable uses and programs exist. G.3. Vendors are being encouraged to take back and reuse pallets and packaging materials. G.4. Suppliers of electronic equipment, including but not limited to computers, monitors, printers, and copiers, will be asked to take back equipment for reuse or environmentally safe recycling when St. Louis Park discards or replaces such equipment, whenever practicable. H. Landscape Maintenance and Materials H.1. Maintenance Contracts The City of St. Louis Park will ask our vendors and suppliers, in contract terms, to use environmentally preferable equipment, materials and techniques in all forms of landscaping and grounds maintenance when practicable. H.2. Landscape Materials The City of St. Louis Park will strive to make sustainable and environmentally preferable decisions in all forms of landscaping and grounds maintenance whenever practicable. This includes, but is not limited to: •Design for sustainability •Design for low maintenance •Design for walkability / bike-ability •Substitute organics for chemicals •Reduce transport of landscape debris whenever possible •Continue to purchase native / locally grown / organic plants and materials Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 14 I. Producer Responsibility I.1. The City of St. Louis Park will, whenever practicable, favor products that are manufactured by companies that take financial and/or physical responsibility for collecting, recycling, reusing, or otherwise safely disposing of their products and packaging at the end of their useful life. While this may not be common practice currently, the Sustainability Coordinator could possibly assist with identifying companies that do adhere to these practices. J. Sustainability of Investments J.1. Whenever practicable, the City of St. Louis Park will avoid making investments in which the city and its employees stand to profit from the extraction, sale, transportation or consumption of fossil fuels or other known environmental hazards. The city will seek out a plan to divest current financial assets held in fossil fuels and reinvest these assets in more sustainable investment areas, such as clean energy when practicable. K. Future Focus K.1. This policy is intended to be a living document that will serve the City for years to come even while sustainability standards evolve. Future policy topics may include, but are not limited to: guidelines on fleet vehicles, purchased landscape materials and services, city building retrofits, city infrastructure service and material procurement, and purchased energy. Rec Center and Park Facilities will put in place regular reviews on their use of toxic chemicals and ways to reduce or eliminate their use. Rec Center will put in place regular reviews on the use of green cleaning products. V. DEFINITIONS Environmentally preferable products and services as defined by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) means products and services that have a lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when compared to competing products and services that serve the same purpose. This applies to raw material acquisition, as well as product manufacturing, distribution, use, maintenance, and disposal. The following attributes should be considered when determining whether a product or service is environmentally preferable: •Available locally •Bio-based •Carcinogen-free •Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) free •Compostable •Durable, reusable or refillable •Energy and water efficient •Heavy metal free (i.e. no lead, mercury, cadmium) •Low toxicity •Low volatile organic compound (VOC) content •Made from renewable products Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 15 •Persistent, Bioaccumulative Toxic (PBT) free •Recycled Content/recyclable •Reduced packaging •Reduced landfill and incineration of materials •Reduce greenhouse gas emissions •Refurbished/refurbishable ASTM – American Society for Testing and Materials. ASTM D6400-04 – the standard specifications for compostable plastic in the US. Available locally – that one or more businesses within the county/city or immediate surrounding areas are able to provide goods and services in a timely manner, and in sufficient quantity and quality to meet a specific department/agency need at a competitive cost. Bio-Based Product – commercial or industrial products (other than food or feed) that utilize plant based contents and residuals but does not include products made from forestry materials. Biodegradable – the ability of a substance, material, or product ingredient to readily decompose by the action of microbes. Being biodegradable does not mean that it is also compostable, however. While a biodegradable item may break down into smaller bits, these components may not be able to provide any nutrients when used as compost. For that reason, ‘compostable’ is preferred. Buyer – anyone authorized to purchase on behalf of this jurisdiction or its subdivisions. Chlorofluorocarbon, (CFC) – the family of compounds of chlorine, fluorine, and carbon. CFC’s contribute to the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer, and have been used as an ingredient for refrigerants, solvents, and for blowing plastic-foam insulation and packaging. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer calls for complete elimination of CFC production. Contractor – any person, group of persons, business, consultant, designing architect, association, partnership, corporation, supplier, vendor or other entity that has a contract with the City of St. Louis Park, serves in a subcontracting capacity with an entity having a contract, or is otherwise hired by the City of St. Louis Park for the provision of goods or services. Dioxins and furans – a group of chemical compounds that are classified as persistent, bio- accumulative, and toxic by the Environmental Protection Agency. Energy Efficient Product – a product that is in the upper 25% of energy efficiency for all similar products, or that is at least 10% more efficient than the minimum level that meets Federal standards. Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 16 Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) – an easy-to-use, on-line tool helping institutional purchasers select and compare computer desktops, laptops and monitors based on their environmental attributes. Energy Star – the US EPA’s energy efficiency product labeling program: http://www.energystar.gov Information Technology – shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following devices: Laptops, Tablets, Desktops, Smart Phones, Servers, Networking devices, Telecom devices, Televisions, Projectors, Audio and Photocopiers. Green building – the incorporation of environmental, health, and waste prevention criteria in building design, site-planning and preparation, materials acquisition, construction or remodeling, deconstruction, and waste disposal. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) – a non-profit organization that promotes social, economic and environmental sustainability. It produces one of the world's most prevalent standards for sustainability reporting which can be used by organizations to report and research sustainability practices. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) – the self-assessing system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council designed for rating new and existing commercial, institutional, and high-rise residential buildings. Credits are earned for satisfying defined criteria and standards. Different levels of green building certification are awarded based on the total credits earned. Light Emitting Diode (LED) – a highly efficient and long lasting form of interior & exterior illumination. Postconsumer Material – a finished material which would normally be disposed of as a solid waste, having reached its intended end-use and completed its life cycle as a consumer item, and does not include manufacturing or converting wastes. Practicable – whenever possible and compatible with state and federal law, without reducing safety, quality, or effectiveness. Pre-consumer Material – material or by-products generated after manufacture of a product is completed but before the product reaches the end-use consumer. Post-consumer recycled material – material that has been discarded for disposal or recovery, having completed its life as a consumer item, and is used as a raw material for new products. Recovered Material – fragments of products or finished products of a manufacturing process, which has converted a resource into a commodity of real economic value, and Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 17 includes pre-consumer and postconsumer material but does not include excess resources of the manufacturing process. Recyclable – a material or product that can be reprocessed, remanufactured, or reused. Recycled Content – the percentage of recovered material, including pre-consumer and postconsumer materials, in a product. Recycled Content Standard – the minimum level of recovered material and/or postconsumer material necessary for products to qualify as recycled products. Recycled Product – a product that meets the City’s recycled content policy objectives for postconsumer and recovered material. Remanufactured Product – any product diverted from the supply of discarded materials by refurbishing and marketing said product without substantial change to its original form. Reused Product – any product designed to be used many times for the same or other purposes. Source Reduction – the net reduction in generation of waste and toxic constituents. US EPA Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines – the most current policies established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for federal agency purchases. Water-Saving Products – products in the upper 25% of water conservation for all similar products, or at least 10% more water-conserving than the minimum level that meets the Federal standards. Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 3) Title: 2019 Work plan for Environment and Sustainability Commission Page 18 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 22, 2019 Written report: 4 Executive summary Title: Food security and access study Recommended action: No action at this time. This report is to inform the city council about the community assessment study of food security and access that is underway by the city’s consultant, Wilder Research. Policy consideration: This study is the to assess the extent of food security and access issues in the city, and discuss what role the city can have in supporting greater food security and access for residents. Please inform staff of any questions you might have. Summary: One of the goals in the city’s health section of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan is to “Ensure all in our community have access to healthy food.” The strategies associated with this goal are: A. Conduct a detailed study to assess food accessibility and security in the community, and determine if there are any gaps. B. Determine what steps the city can take to address gaps in food access and security. For the first part of the study, Wilder Research staff has completed conducting interviews with key informants around the community to gain an understanding of the issues surrounding this topic. Key informant interviews included STEP, Perspectives Kid’s Café, Park Nicollet Foundation and Clinic, Hennepin County Human Services, St. Louis Park School Nutrition Department, SEEDs, Jewish Family and Children Services and many others. Wilder is also in the process of conducting research and mapping data to better understand food issues specifically in St. Louis Park. Wilder will then conduct focus groups with residents who may be impacted by food insecurity, as well as interviewing individuals who can share their personal experiences with food insecurity and access in St. Louis Park. From this information, Wilder will develop recommendations and strategies around ways in which the city can support greater food access and security for residents. The study is expected to be finalized in the fall. Financial or budget considerations: The budget for this work is $50,000 and will be paid for through the 2019 Development Fund budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Principal Planner Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 22, 2019 Written report: 5 Executive summary Title: March 2019 monthly financial report Recommended action: No action required at this time. Policy consideration: Monthly financial reports are part of our financial management policies. Summary: The monthly financial report provides a summary of general fund revenues and departmental expenditures and a comparison of budget to actual throughout the year. A budget to actual summary for the four utility funds is also included in this report. Financial or budget considerations: At the end of March, general fund expenditures were at approximately 23% of the adopted annual budget, which is about 2% under budget. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Discussion Summary of revenues and expenditures – general fund Budget to actual – enterprise funds Prepared by: Darla Monson, Accountant Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 5) Page 2 Title: March 2019 monthly financial report Discussion Background: This monthly report provides summary information of the overall level of revenues and departmental expenditures in the general fund compared to the adopted budget throughout the year. A budget to actual summary for the four utility funds is also included in this report. Present considerations: General Fund Actual expenditures should generally be at about 25% of the annual budget at the end of March. General Fund expenditures were at approximately 23% through March. Revenues are harder to measure in the same way due to the timing of when they are received, examples of which include property taxes, grants and State aid payments. A few comments on variances are explained below. License and permit revenues combined are at 49% of budget through March. Over 85% of the 2019 business and liquor license revenue has already been received, which is typical of prior years. Permit revenue is at 38% through March due to several large commercial permits including PLACE, Bridgewater Bank and Yeshiva School. Organized recreation expenditures are at approximately 30% because the full annual community education contribution of $187,400 was paid to the school district in February, which is consistent with prior years. Vehicle maintenance is over budget by about 3% through March due to winter related overtime, fuel and equipment repair and maintenance expenditures. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Actual $2,885 $5,979 $8,957 Budget $3,257 $6,515 $9,772 $13,029 $16,287 $19,544 $22,801 $26,058 $29,316 $32,573 $35,830 $39,088 $0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $ THOUSANDS Monthly Expenditures -General Fund Summary of Revenues & Expenditures - General Fund As of March 31, 2019 20192019201720172018201820192019Balance YTD Budget BudgetAuditedBudgetUnaudited BudgetYTD Mar Remaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes24,748,436$ 24,837,901$ 25,705,886$ 26,597,928$ 26,880,004$ -$ 26,880,004$ 0.00% Licenses and Permits3,745,736 3,985,517 3,924,648 4,004,394 4,103,424 2,015,268 2,088,156 49.11% Fines & Forfeits254,200 293,236 269,200 282,146 279,700 87,353 192,347 31.23% Intergovernmental1,631,669 1,899,006 1,864,877 2,006,435 1,760,900 382,907 1,377,993 21.74% Charges for Services2,027,637 2,051,552 2,162,410 2,141,528 2,187,319 201,281 1,986,038 9.20% Miscellaneous Revenue1,274,415 1,294,452 1,318,037 1,418,115 1,367,012 378,244 988,768 27.67% Transfers In1,899,927 1,951,218 1,929,090 1,929,076 1,999,877 487,469 1,512,408 24.37% Investment Earnings 140,000 125,984 160,000 61,178 180,000 180,000 0.00% Other Income30,450 54,303 40,950 35,802 31,300 17,568 13,732 56.13% Use of Fund Balance *58,541 - 523,835 298,156 - 298,156 0.00%Total General Fund Revenues35,811,011$ 36,493,169$ 37,898,933$ 38,476,602$ 39,087,692$ 3,570,090$ 35,517,602$ 9.13%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration1,049,123$ 1,056,796$ 1,341,606$ 1,340,282$ 1,837,620$ 346,405$ 1,491,215$ 18.85% Finance957,275 924,832 978,752 963,836 1,034,199 251,444 782,755 24.31% Assessing707,139 652,015 759,865 710,715 772,746 187,352 585,394 24.24% Human Resources754,699 730,731 796,666 735,050 805,620 162,487 643,133 20.17% Community Development1,366,055 1,353,476 1,479,911 1,545,721 1,502,521 366,610 1,135,911 24.40% Facilities Maintenance1,132,774 1,128,339 1,162,342 1,223,109 1,170,211 241,048 929,163 20.60% Information Resources1,570,712 1,421,685 1,589,432 1,533,559 1,674,937 353,840 1,321,097 21.13% Communications & Marketing646,841 722,199 755,940 829,732 805,674 177,696 627,978 22.06% Community Outreach26,553 24,403 27,637 12,085 - - - Engineering376,601 339,876 525,834 552,432 570,377 98,432 471,945 17.26%Total General Government8,587,772$ 8,354,352$ 9,417,985$ 9,446,521$ 10,173,905$ 2,185,314$ 7,988,591$ 21.48% Public Safety: Police9,217,988$ 9,255,342$ 9,930,681$ 9,877,954$ 10,335,497$ 2,514,276$ 7,821,221$ 24.33% Fire Protection4,407,656 4,319,457 4,657,973 4,630,520 4,813,078 1,147,725 3,665,353 23.85% Inspectional Services2,419,073 2,271,301 2,544,762 2,295,910 2,555,335 591,237 1,964,098 23.14%Total Public Safety16,044,717$ 15,846,100$ 17,133,416$ 16,804,384$ 17,703,910$ 4,253,238$ 13,450,672$ 24.02% Operations & Recreation: Public Works Administration266,249$ 245,942$ 230,753$ 208,050$ 290,753$ 58,614$ 232,139$ 20.16% Public Works Operations3,019,017 2,809,715 3,091,857 2,920,481 3,111,481 715,863 2,395,618 23.01% Organized Recreation1,472,996 1,470,613 1,582,490 1,499,223 1,579,569 471,806 1,107,763 29.87% Recreation Center1,744,651 1,856,529 1,860,755 1,991,377 1,949,657 334,888 1,614,769 17.18% Park Maintenance1,721,732 1,797,271 1,830,530 1,846,540 1,833,297 365,459 1,467,838 19.93% Westwood Nature Center602,400 572,942 622,346 599,428 643,750 145,850 497,900 22.66% Natural Resources550,235 430,995 559,662 376,359 484,784 76,211 408,573 15.72% Vehicle Maintenance1,384,038 1,088,375 1,253,367 1,219,431 1,242,236 346,552 895,684 27.90%Total Operations & Recreation10,761,318$ 10,272,383$ 11,031,760$ 10,660,889$ 11,135,527$ 2,515,243$ 8,620,284$ 22.59% Non-Departmental: General 31,909$ 31,859$ 43,422$ 42,064$ -$ -$ -$ Transfers Out- 885,000 - - - - - 0.00% Council Programs198,000 110,105 - - - Contingency385,295 188,254 74,350 - 74,350 2,795 71,555 3.76%Total Non-Departmental417,204$ 1,105,113$ 315,772$ 152,169$ 74,350$ 2,795$ 71,555$ 3.76%Total General Fund Expenditures35,811,011$ 35,577,947$ 37,898,933$ 37,063,963$ 39,087,692$ 8,956,590$ 30,131,102$ 22.91%*Primarily related to E911 capital items from restricted fund balance.Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 5) Title: March 2019 monthly financial reportPage 3 Budget to Actual - Enterprise FundsAs of March 31, 2019 Current BudgetMar Year To DateBudget Variance% of BudgetCurrent BudgetMar Year To DateBudget Variance% of BudgetCurrent BudgetMar Year To DateBudget Variance% of BudgetCurrent BudgetMar Year To DateBudget Variance% of BudgetOperating revenues: User charges 6,857,853$ 870,043$ 5,987,810$ 12.69% 7,513,922$ 954,983$ 6,558,939$ 12.71% 3,409,250$ 287,950$ 3,121,300$ 8.45% 2,900,839$ 505,085$ 2,395,754$ 17.41% Other 375,750 358,695 17,055 95.46% 30,000 2,564 27,436 8.55% 153,500 51 153,449 0.03% - - Total operating revenues7,233,603 1,228,738 6,004,865 16.99% 7,543,922 957,547 6,586,375 12.69% 3,562,750 288,001 3,274,749 8.08% 2,900,839 505,085 2,395,754 17.41%Operating expenses: Personal services1,397,512 373,497 1,024,015 26.73% 717,237 188,869 528,368 26.33% 599,774 144,286 455,488 24.06% 807,245 162,940 644,305 20.18% Supplies & non-capital324,800 42,062 282,738 12.95% 68,600 11,310 57,290 16.49% 222,550 9,563 212,987 4.30% 12,500 65 12,435 0.52% Services & other charges1,736,196 251,752 1,484,444 14.50% 4,784,255 1,515,572 3,268,683 31.68%2,952,323 429,762 2,522,561 14.56% 325,903 22,565 303,338 6.92% Depreciation * Total operating expenses3,458,508 667,311 2,791,197 19.29% 5,570,092 1,715,751 3,854,341 30.80% 3,774,647 583,611 3,191,036 15.46% 1,145,648 185,570 960,078 16.20%Operating income (loss)3,775,095 561,428 3,213,667 14.87% 1,973,830 (758,203) 2,732,033 -38.41% (211,897) (295,610) 83,713 139.51% 1,755,191 319,515 1,435,676 18.20%Nonoperating revenues (expenses): Interest income 15,172 15,172 0.00% 7,200 7,200 0.00% 18,100 18,100 0.00% 14,175 14,175 0.00% Debt issuance costs- - - - - - - Interest expense/bank charges(478,969) (252,741) (226,228) 52.77% (137,428) (43,946) (93,482) 31.98% (25,500) (3,250) (22,250) 12.75% (37,672) (10,680) (26,992) 28.35% Total nonoperating rev (exp)(463,797) (252,741) (211,056) 54.49% (130,228) (43,946) (86,282) 33.75% (7,400) (3,250) (4,150) 43.92% (23,497) (10,680) (12,817) 45.45%Income (loss) before transfers3,311,298 308,687 3,002,611 9.32% 1,843,602 (802,149) 2,645,751 -43.51% (219,297) (298,860) 79,563 136.28% 1,731,694 308,835 1,422,859 17.83%Transfers inTransfers out(620,034) (155,009) (465,026) 25.00% (848,335) (212,084) (636,251) 25.00% (241,057) (60,264) (180,793) 25.00% (332,165) (83,041) (249,124) 25.00%NET INCOME (LOSS)2,691,264 153,678 2,537,586 5.71% 995,267 (1,014,233) 2,009,500 -101.91% (460,354) (359,124) (101,230) 78.01% 1,399,529 225,794 1,173,735 16.13%Items reclassified to bal sht at year end: Capital Outlay(5,383,474) (70,085) (5,313,389) 1.30% (1,530,238) (41,861) (1,488,377) 2.74%- - - (3,139,505) (41,861) (3,097,644) 1.33%Revenues over/(under) expenditures(2,692,210) 83,594 (2,775,804) (534,971) (1,056,094) 521,123 (460,354) (359,124) (101,230) (1,739,976) 183,933 (1,923,909) *Depreciation is recorded at end of year (non-cash item).Water SewerSolid WasteStorm WaterStudy session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 5) Title: March 2019 monthly financial reportPage 4 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 22, 2019 Written report: 6 Executive summary Title: First quarter investment report (Jan. – March 2019) Recommended action: No action required at this time. Policy consideration: Reporting on investments quarterly is part of our financial management policies. Summary: The quarterly investment report provides an overview of the City’s investment portfolio, including the types of investments held, length of maturity and yield. Financial or budget considerations: The total portfolio value at March 31, 2019 is $46.1 million. Approximately $36 million is invested in longer term securities including U.S. Treasury notes, Federal agency bonds, municipal debt securities and certificates of deposit. The remainder of the portfolio is held in money market accounts and commercial paper for cash flow needs between property tax settlements. The overall yield to maturity increased to 2.15% from 2.08% at the end of 2018. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Discussion Investment portfolio summary Prepared by: Darla Monson, Accountant Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Page 2 Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 6) Title: First quarter investment report (Jan. – March 2019) Discussion Background: The City’s investment portfolio is focused on short term cash flow needs and investment in longer term securities. This is done in accordance with Minnesota Statute 118A and the City’s investment policy objectives of: 1) Preservation of capital; 2) Liquidity; and 3) Return on investment. Present considerations: The portfolio value decreased in the first quarter to $46.1 million at March 31, 2019 from $64.9 million at December 31, 2018. Money market balances and commercial paper maturities account for almost the entire change. A large amount of cash was needed in the first quarter including $5.5 million for the February 1 debt service payments, $2.9 million for the February 1 pay as you go TIF note payments and $2.9 million for the first SWLRT payment, in addition to the normal cash requirements for payroll and operating expenses. The next property tax settlement will be a 70% advance of the first half tax payments on June 21, 2019. The overall yield of the portfolio increased to 2.15%, compared to 2.08% at December 31 and 1.57% one year ago. This is the combined yield including both cash held in money market accounts and long term investments. Cities will typically use a benchmark such as the two year Treasury (2.27% on March 29, 2019) or a similar measure for yield comparison of their overall portfolio. There was approximately $8.9 million in money market accounts at the end of the quarter, including bond proceeds of about $3.9 million from the 2017 and 2018 bonds. Money market rates increased again this quarter to between 2.16% - 2.27% and are nearly 1% higher than they were one year ago. In addition to the cash held in money market accounts, the portfolio has one $800,000 commercial paper security with a rate of 2.97% that will mature in August 2019. Commercial paper are promissory notes with short maturity periods issued by financial institutions and large corporations and usually have higher rates than money market accounts for investing cash in the shorter term. Two commercial paper securities matured during the quarter and were not reinvested anticipating cash needed early in the second quarter for the $3.1 million loan to Sherman & Associates for the acquisition of the former Vision Bank property. Another $3.1 million of the portfolio is invested in certificates of deposit. None matured during the quarter so there are still 13 CD’s in the portfolio, each with a face value of $245,000 or less, which guarantees that each CD is insured by the FDIC up to $250,000. The maturity dates range from 2 to 19 months and rates of 1.75% to 2.3%. The remaining $33.3 million of the portfolio is invested in other long term securities which include municipal bonds ($5.4 mil), Federal agency bonds ($8.9 mil) and U.S. Treasury notes ($19 mil). Municipal bonds are issued by states, local governments, or school districts to finance special projects. Agency bonds are issued by government agencies such as the Federal Home Loan Bank and Fannie Mae and may have call dates where they can be called prior to final maturity. There were several trades made during the quarter exchanging securities with yields as low as .89% to 1.93% with U.S. Treasuries and agencies of 2.51% to 2.65%. These new purchases were primarily longer term securities with maturity dates out 4 to 5 years to balance out the portfolio. Page 3 Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 6) Title: First quarter investment report (Jan. – March 2019) This table is a summary of the City’s portfolio at March 31, 2019: Next steps: None at this time. 12/31/18 3/31/19 <1 Year 55% 35% 1-2 Years 13% 15% 2-3 Years 21% 22% 3-4 Years 11% 23% >4 Years 0% 5% 12/31/18 3/31/19 Money Markets/Cash $26,728,299 $8,908,277 Commercial Paper $2,376,488 $792,624 Certificates of Deposit $3,065,108 $3,075,973 Municipal Debt $5,423,634 $5,441,074 Agencies/Treasuries $27,344,809 $27,865,991 City of St. Louis Park Investment Portfolio Summary March 31, 2019 Institution/Broker Investment Type CUSIP Maturity Date Yield Par Value Market Value at 3/31/2019 Estimated Avg Annual Income Citizens Indep Bank Money Market 0.21%1,472 1,472 3 4M Liquid Asset Money Market 2.16%1,597,211 1,597,211 34,500 4MP Liquid Asset Money Market 2.20%2,994 2,994 66 4MP 2017A Bonds Money Market 2.16%256,058 256,058 5,531 4MP 2018A Bonds Money Market 2.20%3,645,783 3,645,783 80,207 5,502,046 UBS Institutional Money Market & Cash 2.27% 3,404,759 3,404,759 77,288 PFM Comm Paper - BNP Paribas 09659CV62 08/06/2019 2.97% 800,000 792,624 23,760 792,624 PFM CD - Cit Bank UT 17284CH49 06/04/2019 1.90% 240,000 239,808 4,560 PFM CD - Amer Exp F UT 02587CAC4 07/10/2019 1.95% 240,000 239,743 4,680 PFM CD - Capital One Bank 14042E4S6 07/15/2019 1.95% 240,000 239,650 4,680 PFM CD - First Bk Highland IL 3191408W2 08/13/2019 2.00% 240,000 239,654 4,800 PFM CD - Webster Bk NA CT 94768NJX3 08/20/2019 1.90% 240,000 239,626 4,560 PFM CD - Capital One Bank 140420PS3 10/08/2019 2.10% 240,000 239,604 5,040 PFM CD - State Bk India IL 856283XJ0 10/15/2019 2.10% 240,000 239,597 5,040 PFM CD - Goldman Sachs Bank NY 38148JHB0 01/14/2020 2.20% 240,000 239,520 5,280 PFM CD - Amer Express UT 02587DXE3 01/30/2020 1.95% 240,000 239,026 4,680 PFM CD - Camden Nat'l Bank ME 133033DR8 02/26/2020 1.80% 240,000 239,069 4,320 PFM CD - Private Bank & Tr IL 74267GVA2 02/27/2020 1.75% 240,000 239,172 4,200 PFM CD - World's Foremost 9159919E5 08/06/2020 2.30% 200,000 197,304 4,600 PFM CD - Comenity Cap Bk UT 20033AND4 10/13/2020 2.00% 245,000 244,201 4,900 3,075,973 PFM Muni Debt - Williamston Mich Sch 970294CN2 05/01/2019 1.46% 2,000,000 1,998,840 29,200 PFM Muni Debt - New York City 64971WUX6 08/01/2019 1.33% 2,000,000 1,995,100 26,600 PFM Muni Debt - Connecticut St 20772JKN1 10/15/2020 1.78% 1,000,000 993,070 17,800 PFM Muni Debt - California St 13063DGA0 04/01/2021 2.80% 450,000 454,064 12,600 5,441,074 PFM FNMA 3135G0T60 07/30/2020 1.60%1,250,000 1,235,563 20,000 PFM US Treasury Note 912828L32 08/31/2020 1.09% 600,000 591,564 6,540 PFM FHLB 3130ACE26 09/28/2020 1.48% 575,000 566,404 8,510 PFM FHLMC 3137EAEJ4 09/29/2020 1.69% 530,000 524,318 8,957 PFM FHLMC 3137EAEK1 11/17/2020 1.91% 800,000 793,904 15,280 PFM US Treasury Note 912828N48 12/31/2020 1.02% 150,000 148,524 1,530 PFM US Treasury Note 912828N48 12/31/2020 1.12% 750,000 742,620 8,400 PFM Freddie Mac 3137EAEL9 02/16/2021 2.47% 800,000 800,776 19,760 PFM Fannie Mae 3135G0U27 04/13/2021 2.55% 500,000 501,855 12,750 PFM US Treasury Note 912828Q78 04/30/2021 1.86% 250,000 245,430 4,650 PFM US Treasury Note 912828Q78 04/30/2021 1.87% 675,000 662,661 12,623 PFM US Treasury Note 912828R77 05/31/2021 2.02% 1,600,000 1,569,696 32,320 PFM Fannie Mae 3135G0U35 06/22/2021 2.76% 700,000 706,650 19,320 PFM FHLB Global 3130A8QS5 07/14/2021 1.25% 750,000 730,245 9,375 PFM US Treasury Note 912828D72 08/31/2021 1.73% 650,000 645,912 11,245 PFM US Treasury Note 912828D72 08/31/2021 1.85% 1,150,000 1,142,767 21,275 PFM FHLB 3130AEXV7 09/20/2021 3.00% 750,000 752,048 22,500 PFM FHLB 3130AF5B9 10/12/2021 3.02% 750,000 762,915 22,650 PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.72% 700,000 682,367 12,040 PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.64% 575,000 560,516 9,430 PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.85% 200,000 194,962 3,700 PFM FNMA 3135G0U92 01/11/2022 2.65% 400,000 403,620 10,600 PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 1.96% 700,000 692,454 13,720 PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.12% 850,000 840,837 18,020 PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.18% 800,000 791,376 17,440 PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.69% 1,300,000 1,285,986 34,970 PFM US Treasury Note 912828TJ9 08/15/2022 2.76% 1,050,000 1,029,242 28,980 PFM US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 3.00% 950,000 946,105 28,500 PFM US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.78% 1,000,000 995,900 27,800 PFM US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.51% 2,550,000 2,539,545 64,005 PFM US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.55% 1,675,000 1,668,133 42,713 PFM US Treasury Note 912828R69 05/31/2023 2.53% 1,000,000 975,550 25,300 PFM Fannie Mae 3135G0V34 02/05/2024 2.58% 625,000 630,869 16,125 PFM FHLB 3130AFW94 02/13/2024 2.58% 500,000 504,680 12,900 27,865,991 GRAND TOTAL 46,083,939 992,822 Current Portfolio Yield To Maturity 2.15% Study session meeting of April 22, 2019 (Item No. 6) Title: First quarter investment report (Jan. – March 2019) Page 4