Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020/05/04 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA MAY 4, 2020 All meetings of the St. Louis Park City Council will be conducted by telephone or other electronic means starting March 30, 2020, and until further notice. This is in accordance with a local emergency declaration issued by city council, in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Additionally, city facilities are closed to the public until May 18 in keeping with the April 30, 2020, Executive Order 20-48 issued by Gov. Tim Walz extending the order directing Minnesotans to Stay at Home until May 18. Some or all members of the St. Louis Park City Council will participate in the May 4, 2020 city council meeting by electronic device or telephone rather than by being personally present at the city council's regular meeting place at 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. Members of the public can monitor this meeting by video and audio at https://bit.ly/watchslpcouncil and on local cable (Comcast SD channel 17, or CenturyLink SD channel 8117 and HD channel 8617 ) or by calling +1-312-535-8110 meeting number (access code): 359 770 50 for audio only. Cisco Webex will be used to conduct videoconference meetings of the city council, with council members and staff participating from multiple locations. Members of the public wishing to address the city council should call 952-928-1304 to provide public comment on the consent agenda, 952-562-2888 to provide public comment on item 6a-Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA), and 952-928-1304 to provide public comment on item 8a-Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive. If you wish to provide public comment, please call when the meeting starts at 6:30 p.m. and follow instructions provided. Comments will be taken during each item in the order they are received. Public comments must relate to an item on the current city council agenda. 6:20 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 1.Call to order 2.Roll call 3.Approval of minutes -- None 5.Reports 5a. Approval of EDA disbursements Recommended action: Motion to accept for filing EDA disbursement claims for the period of March 28, through April 24, 2020. 7.New business -- None Meeting of May 4, 2020 City council agenda 6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1. Call to order 1a. Pledge of allegiance 1b. Roll call 2. Presentations -- None 3. Approval of minutes 3a. City council meeting minutes of April 6, 2020 3b. Study session meeting minutes of March 30, 2020 4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar NOTE: The consent calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The items for the consent calendar are listed on the last page of the agenda. Recommended action: Motion to approve the agenda as presented and items listed on the consent calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, or move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion.) 5. Boards and commissions -- None 6. Public hearings 6a. Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take testimony, and then close the public hearing. 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – None 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items 8a. Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the installation of parking restrictions on the north side of the S County Road 25 Service Drive as well as the south side of the service drive within 50 feet of each intersection between Beltline Boulevard and Inglewood Avenue. 9. Communications – None Meeting of May 4, 2020 City council agenda Consent calendar 4a. Accept for filing city disbursement claims for the period of March 28, through April 24, 2020. 4b. Approve Second Reading of Ordinance vacating the right-of-way between 31st Street West and the Highway 7 Frontage Road between Glenhurst Avenue South and Inglewood Avenue South and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication. 4c. • Adopt Resolution authorizing 2019 fund equity transfers. • Adopt Resolution authorizing 2020 budget amendments. 4d. Approve for filing planning commission minutes of Feb. 19, 2020. 4e. Approve for filing planning commission minutes of March 4, 2020. 4f. Adopt Resolution approving relocation of polling place for Ward 3, Precinct 9, from Knollwood Place Apartments to St. Louis Park Municipal Svc. Center, 7305 Oxford St. 4g. Adopt Resolution rescinding item 9 of Resolution 3681, authorizing the installation of parking restrictions on both sides of the road within 50 feet of the intersection of 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue, and authorizing timed parking restrictions on the west side of Kipling Avenue north of Excelsior Boulevard. 4h. Adopt Resolution authorizing the installation of parking restrictions on the east side of Hampshire Avenue near the NW driveway of 6715 Minnetonka Boulevard. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular city council meetings are carried live on civic TV cable channel 17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and saved for video on demand replays. During the COVID-19 pandemic, agendas will be posted on Fridays on the entrance doors to city hall and on the text display on civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available after noon on Friday on the city’s website. If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952-924-2525. Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 5a Executive summary Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is categorized as a Required Action** •Motion to accept for filing EDA disbursement claims for the period of March 28, through April 24, 2020. Policy consideration: Does the EDA desire to approve EDA disbursements in accordance with Article V – Administration of Finances, of the EDA bylaws? Summary: The finance division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the EDA to review and approve. The attached reports show both EDA disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable. Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of the information follows the EDA’s charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: EDA disbursements Prepared by: Kari Mahan, accounting clerk Reviewed by: Tim Simon, chief financial officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:11:55R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 26,400.00AMHERST H. WILDER FOUNDATION DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING 26,400.00 2,201.63CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING 2,201.63 225.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC BELTLINE SWLRT DEVELOPMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.124900 EXC BLVD TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.12ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.12WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.12ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.12CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.12MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.12PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 183.75EDGEWOOD TIF DIST G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.12WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.17SHOREHAM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 94.12HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,350.00 29,903.18ELECTRICAL PRODUCTION SERVICES, INC. CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 29,903.18 7,234.50HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING 7,234.50 36.82IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A PLANNING 36.82 1,856.95KENNEDY & GRAVEN MTKA BLVD PROPERTIES LEGAL SERVICES 60.00WEST END TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES 75.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES 1,991.95 3,000.00LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES 3,000.00 2,500.00MARQUETTE ADVISORS, INC.BELTLINE SWLRT DEVELOPMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,500.00 542,292.38OLD REPUBLIC TITLE DEVELOPMENT - EDA BALANCE SHEE LAND HELD FOR RESALE Economic development authority meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 5a) Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Page 2 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:11:55R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 542,292.38 64,519.07ST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS BUREAU CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-CVB 64,519.07 117.50WANTA ERIC MTKA BLVD PROPERTIES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 117.50 Report Totals 681,547.03 Economic development authority meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 5a) Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Page 3 Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Minutes: 3a Unofficial minutes City council meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota April 6, 2020 1. Call to order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Anne Mavity, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Communications Manager (Ms. Smith), Senior Management Analyst (Ms. Solano), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guests: Patrick Crowe, developer; residents of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley over phone 1a. Pledge of allegiance 1b. Roll call 2. Presentations - none 3. Approval of minutes 3a. City council meeting minutes of Feb. 18, 2020 It was moved by Councilmember Kraft, seconded by Councilmember Mohamed, to approve the Feb. 18, 2020 meeting minutes as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar 4a. Accept for filing city disbursement claims for the period of February 22 through March 27, 2020. 4b. Reject the bids received on March 5, 2020 for the Louisiana Avenue Bridge Project. 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 20-067 to recognize Office Assistant Karen Murphy for her 25 years of service. 4d. Designate Visu-Sewer as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $314,318.05 for the sanitary sewer mainline rehabilitation project no. 4020-3000. 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 20-068 rescinding Resolution 17-177, removing permit parking restrictions at 2829 Louisiana Avenue. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Title: City council meeting minutes of April 6, 2020 4f. Motion to adopt Resolution No. 20-069 approving the preliminary and final plat of Cedarwood Dachis Addition. Motion to adopt Resolution No. 20-070 approving a variance to allow accessory structure in the side yard. 4g. Approve right of way purchase for parcel 1 and parcel 2 for Dakota bikeway and bridge project. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to approve the agenda as presented and items listed on the consent calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and commissions - none 6. Public hearings - none 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public A petition for the southeast bikeway project, specifically for the segment of Wooddale Avenue from 44th Street to Morningside Road, was presented by Lori Larson, 4379 Wooddale Ave. She stated 100% of the residents on this block have signed the petition, stating they prefer no parking bays on the street, and adding residents will utilize their driveways to accommodate their own and neighbor’s parking needs. Ms. Larson stated the neighborhood believes this plan is consistent with staff’s initial proposal and thanked the council for taking this under consideration in the hopes of making a change to the design council approved in March. It was the consensus of the council to accept the petition presented and direct staff to bring the item back for council discussion at a future study session. 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items 8a. Cedar Place redevelopment Resolution No. 20-071 Resolution No. 20-072 Resolution No. 20-073 Ms. Kramer presented the staff report. She noted the developer, Patrick Crowe, requests city approvals in order to construct a new 79-unit apartment development on property located at 4900 Cedar Lake Rd., 4905 Old Cedar Lake Rd., and 5005 Old Cedar Lake Rd. The developer seeks a comprehensive plan amendment to re-guide the 5005 Old Cedar Lake Road parcel from office to high density residential; a preliminary and final plat to combine the three parcels into one; and a planned unit development to rezone the site. The development would meet the city’s inclusionary housing and green building policies and construction would begin in spring 2020 and open for leasing in fall 2021. Ms. Kramer noted the public engagement process included a project sign at the sight, a project webpage on the city website, notifications on social media, a neighborhood City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 3 Title: City council meeting minutes of April 6, 2020 meeting on January 23, 2020, and a public hearing on February 5, 2020. She stated concerns from the public have been traffic, scale, and setting a precedent. Staff and planning commission recommend approval of all applications. Councilmember Brausen stated he has visited the site several times and one feature of the property is the mature oak trees that surround it. He stated one tree will be taken down in the center but asked about keeping the others on Quentin and Cedar Lake Road. Ms. Kramer stated yes those on Quentin and Old Cedar Lake Road will be preserved. Councilmember Harris asked if the city’s ground floor transparency policy only pertains to commercial districts, and if so, as it relates to PUDs, how does this meet the policy that the council recently approved. Ms. Kramer stated the policy applies to commercial and restaurants. Mr. Walther added the ordinance does not apply to all PUDs, although options can be explored. Councilmember Harris noted in the staff report, it states a portion of the building could be converted to commercial if less parking is needed in the future. She stated walkability design may be worth considering if this occurs. Councilmember Mavity agreed with Councilmember Harris and added the council must be clear about walkability and the pedestrian experience, by putting pedestrians first with the design and when new designs are created within communities. Councilmember Mavity asked about the density, and if a PUD was not included, would the number of units be allowed under this site, and how many floors would be allowed. Ms. Kramer stated this area is all currently zoned high-density residential so fewer units would be allowed if there is no PUD. She added building height would be allowed under the current zoning. Councilmember Mavity noted Connect the Park plans included another pedestrian bridge connecting over Highway 100 and asked if that was still in the plan. Ms. Heiser stated the west side bridge is more feasible at this point. Councilmember Rog asked about the shadow study conducted on the project and what the results were. Ms. Kramer stated a shadow study was conducted and met all city requirements. Ms. Kramer presented the shadow study slide to the council for review. Councilmember Kraft asked about the good neighbor agreement on the project. Mr. Crowe, the developer, stated this agreement was drafted related to the issue with cut- throughs in the neighborhood, adding that signage would be included, and it would also be noted in the lease agreement that cut-throughs are discouraged. Councilmember Kraft asked about the traffic study and if staff could clarify the number of trips. Ms. Kramer stated the planning commission directed staff to do an additional traffic study and trips per day were in the range of 348-400. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 4 Title: City council meeting minutes of April 6, 2020 Councilmember Kraft asked if this is less than 5% of what is on the roads today. Ms. Kramer stated if all trips from the apartment building were on Quentin, this would increase traffic by less than 5%. Mr. Walther added the trip numbers in the staff report are an estimate only. Councilmember Kraft asked Mr. Crowe if the solar array on the roof will utilize the full space of the roof. Mr. Crowe stated the solar panels will take up 70% of the roof and will meet the solar program requirements of the city at 86 kilowatts. Councilmember Kraft also asked if the building will be able to support electric heating at some point. Mr. Crowe stated it will, adding that 25% of the units will have electric heat and in the future additional units will be able to change out the HVAC and have solar or electric heat as well. Councilmember Brausen asked if the first floor of parking could be converted to additional apartments and not commercial. Mr. Crowe answered yes and stated if they are converted to retail or commercial at a later date, the parking area can be expanded to walkouts and windows can be added to the walls for retail or a coffee shop. Residents living near the development spoke by telephone to the councilmembers. Diane Karpen, 1400 Natchez Ave. S., Golden Valley, stated she is the co-sponsor of a petition that has over 163 supporters. She noted their prime concern is traffic on Natchez Avenue, and added she has been working with Golden Valley. She stated data on the traffic study compared to 2015 showed a 50% increase on Natchez Avenue, since the West End was developed, because there are very few passes, so many drivers cut through. She stated they are able to prove the city’s studies may not be projecting traffic correctly and with three more developments coming to the West End, there will be incremental traffic added to the concern. She said there is a sign related to not cutting through the neighborhood, but it has been ineffective. She added they do not trust the good neighbor comments, and noted their street is used for pedestrian traffic as there is no sidewalk there now, and that should be considered as well. Evan Sundquist, 1632 Princeton Ave., stated he lives just adjacent and north of the proposed development. He is concerned with the way the meeting is being conducted tonight and that the neighborhoods’ voices will not be heard. He stated he has looked at the proposed parking in the West End area and added up about 4,500 additional parking spots, which means about 3,500 additional cars will be coming in the area to get into the parking ramps. He stated there is current traffic cutting through to Benilde, this area is not the West End, and all buildings north of Benilde are no more than two stories tall. Jessica Duplessis, 1632 Princeton Ave., stated she is concerned about the size and scale of the proposed property. She noted this is a 6-story building going into an area that has only 1-2 story homes and will fundamentally change the character of the neighborhood. She stated the West End is a commercial district and she is concerned the lighting will shine into her bedroom 24/7. She is also worried about light pollution and sound pollution in the neighborhood. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 5 Title: City council meeting minutes of April 6, 2020 Betsy Decortez, 1425 Natchez Ave., has concerns about traffic and safety. She stated traffic calming needs to be included and the good neighbor agreement is nice but will do nothing. She stated the traffic cut throughs will continue to increase, and she strongly requests traffic calming be included now versus later. Peter Beck spoke on behalf of Fiat Luther at 1820 Quentin Ave. He stated they are not opposed to the project but do share some concerns on traffic and removing office use between the dealership and the project. He stated there will then be incompatible uses without the buffer, residents will be looking down on the dealership, and they are concerned there will be complaints about the dealership. He stated they asked the developer to put a notice in the lease about the dealership so residents are aware, but the developer would not do this – so they are asking the city to add this. He added changing the area from office commercial to residential will change the impact of the noise ordinance and reduce it, which may be a problem for the dealership. TJ King, 2532 Joppa Ave., stated she is in support of the project and added it is a good choice for use of the land. She would rather see something attractive and well thought out, such as this project. She prefers to see a project that people live in vs. a coffee shop and she hopes residents will use the bike paths. Ms. King stated the project will provide work for people, especially now when many are out of work, noting Mr. Crowe lives in the area, knows the area, and has concerns about the area. She stated he is a man of vision, makes logical choices, puts himself into projects, and this will be good for the city and the area. Jessica Anderson, 1345 Natchez Ave., stated she supports development in this area but is not happy about the scale of the project, which could create problems. She is sorry about the format for tonight’s meeting since many more would have come to speak, but she does appreciate the traffic study. She has concerns about the infrastructure of the neighborhood and doesn’t believe the good neighbor agreements will work. She asked if there is a way to allocate funds to the trails in neighborhoods most affected by developments, added the scale is too high for residential, and asked why set this precedent. Councilmember Brausen stated he will support the proposal and staff recommendations, noting this is a Ward 4 project. He thanked Mr. Crowe for bringing this project to the city and making the financial commitment to develop here. He thanked staff and the residents both from St. Louis Park and Golden Valley who shared their thoughts. Councilmember Brausen stated this is a thoughtful development which enhances the city’s housing resources. It is near major highways and the developer will support pedestrian and bike trails at his own expense. He noted the property abuts the car dealership to the west, office and multi-family homes on the south and east, and single- family residences to the north. It will only have 79 units, 5 stories, and will reach a height of 55 feet on the north side of the property, which is not much taller than the former farmhouse northeast of the site. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 6 Title: City council meeting minutes of April 6, 2020 Councilmember Brausen stated the parking is adequate and exceeds code requirements by 14 spaces and there will be 112 bike spaces, again in excess of the city’s requirements. He stated the development will create 8 affordable units for folks who make 50% of our area median income, which is 8 more units than the current market is delivering. He noted almost one-half of the community lives in rental housing, which is a reflection of the high cost of housing in St. Louis Park. He added that most residents would want to own their own house in St. Louis Park, but limited income and the high cost of building now keeps a majority of residents unable to do so. He added he could not even afford to purchase a home in St. Louis Park today, and those that can are very lucky. He noted the city is fortunate developers find St. Louis Park a desirable location for building rental housing. Councilmember Brausen added this proposal is a model of green building, which will preserve mature oak trees, provide solar and a partial green roof, while using native plants, provide electrical vehicle charging, high efficiency HVAC, energy efficient building systems including LED lighting, motion sensors, low flow showers, duo flush toilets, natural ventilation, and reduce carbon emissions and greenhouse gasses over time. He noted some are concerned about traffic, but staff has modeled traffic flow and stated there will be 400 or fewer car trips per day originating at the site – with all of it going onto Cedar Lake Road, which already handles thousands of cars daily. He stated the roads in that area can handle this less than 5% increase of traffic, as noted in the staff report. Assuming less than 25% of the traffic goes in that direction, with the vast majority on Cedar Lake Road, the increased traffic will be under 100 additional vehicles daily. Councilmember Brausen noted city staff will continue to monitor traffic and use mitigation measures as necessary. He stated given the current economic market in this country, financing new development will be challenging. He stated he is glad this proposal addresses so many of the city goals and he will support it. Councilmember Mavity stated she will support this project, while noting she does understand the neighborhood concerns. She stated the current guided use is what the development proposes, and it is also consistent with the city’s 2040 vision. She added the project supports green communities and is aligned with what the city is committed to. She suggested there might be ways to manage the traffic between Golden Valley and St. Louis Park, by creating some one ways and improvements as needed. She does not like the parking on the first floor, but does like the design that anticipates future development, so she can live with that. She added the council will need to be clear this is not the kind of design that is desired in the city. Councilmember Mavity noted concerns about light pollution and stated there were also complaints at Fresh Thyme on Excelsior Boulevard, but the owners made corrections after the fact. She stated she would ask the developer of this project to make adjustments on the north side related to lighting, so it is minimized in this single-family neighborhood. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 7 Title: City council meeting minutes of April 6, 2020 Councilmember Kraft added he supports the project as well but does understand the concerns residents addressed. He noted traffic is one such concern but added it does not seem this development will significantly increase traffic, in light of the study conducted. He is glad the city is working with Golden Valley on the cut through at Natchez Avenue, and encouraged staff to review the three-way stop at Quentin and Cedar Lake Road as well. He stated the size of the building is a concern; however, it does still fit the guidance of the area. He stated he will support the project as it would help the city meet its rental needs and reduce upward price pressure. Councilmember Kraft stated it is a thoughtful development and he is impressed with the environmental component including the solar array on the parking structure. He added he is happy to see the affordable housing component as well. He would also support improvements on biking and sidewalks, and he is happy that Mr. Crowe is from St. Louis Park as well. Councilmember Harris stated this project is an example of taking a smaller development and maximizing an opportunity. She supports the density of the project and thoughtfulness of the ecological design, walking/biking and affordability is also appropriate. She stated she would rather see it as 4-5 levels vs. 6 levels, but the amenities balance it out and she will support the project. Councilmember Mohamed stated overall she is in agreement with the project and agreed with Councilmember Brausen’s points on demand for rental property in St. Louis Park, as housing is so expensive in the city, and this will address that issue. She added she would have appreciated more affordability in the project, but it meets the requirements of the city, so she is grateful for that. Councilmember Rog asked about the rent for the non-affordable units. Mr. Crowe stated the rents will be 7% lower than at the West End residential units currently. Councilmember Rog asked what the maximum occupancy in the one-bedroom units is. Mr. Crowe stated two people. Councilmember Rog stated she still has concerns about the notification and timing of the project from the city to residents, adding the city can do better at that, so neighbors feel better about the process. She noted that she acknowledges the 6-story building will have a negative effect on the area, but she is glad to see this blighted property proposed for development, and is happy about the tree preservation, affordability, and mitigation for the neighbors. With regard to affordability, Councilmember Rog stated while the project complies with the city’s policy, at the same time, the West End has the most expensive rents in the metro area. She stated in the future, the city can do better on this, adding St. Louis Park does not need to have 90% luxury apartments. She added it will be important to think about the kind of impression the city wants to give developers, on what the city wants to see from developers, along with ensuring the size of units comply with affordable housing requirements. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3a) Page 8 Title: City council meeting minutes of April 6, 2020 Councilmember Rog stated she would like to see more traffic calming measures, adding if the light ordinance allows for problem areas within the city, this might need to be revisited. Mayor Spano stated he will support the project as well, and thinks the project is a good step in the right direction. He stated he would want greater affordability and acknowledges the sustainability aspects of the project. He understands the issue with lighting, adding he hopes the developer will respect the residents’ wishes here, and make changes, similar to what Fresh Thyme and Methodist Hospital did, as members of a resident neighborhood. Mayor Spano stated residents noted there are no sidewalks in the neighborhood, and suggested the city reach out to Golden Valley to discuss their interests in installing sidewalks in this area, working together to support infrastructure in that area. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt Resolution No. 20-071 approving the amendments to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Plan Map, as well as related figures, tables and text. The motion passed 7-0. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mohamed, to adopt Resolution No. 20-072 approving the preliminary and final plat for Cedar Place Addition; adopt Resolution No. 20-073 rescinding Resolutions 1953 and 1988 relating to property located at 5005 Old Cedar Lake Road; and, approving the first reading of an ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 16 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from R-C high-density multiple-family residence to PUD 16, and set the second reading for April 20, 2020. The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Mr. Harmening stated the city website has daily updates on COVID-19. Mayor Spano stated he has been doing a video also on Tuesdays and Fridays for residents to view, which has generated many questions. He thanked staff for answering these questions quickly on social media. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Minutes: 3b Unofficial minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota March 30, 2020 The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Anne Mavity, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog. Councilmembers absent: none. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), CFO (Mr. Simon), CIO (Mr. Pires), Police Chief Harcey, Fire Chief Koering, Building and Energy Director (Mr. Hoffman), Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Racial Equity Manager (Ms. Sojourner), Communications Manager (Ms. Smith), Senior Management Analyst (Ms. Solano), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guests: None 1. Covid-19 Update Staff provided an update to the council on the current state of the Covid-19 pandemic including reports from: Fire, Police, Operations/Recreation, Finance, Human Resources, Racial Equity, Inclusion and Outreach, Engineering, Community Development, Information Resources, Building and Energy and other general administration topics. Fire Chief Koering stated he serves as the Emergency Management Coordinator during the pandemic. He stated the city continues to operate at a level 4, which has been working very well. He noted the pandemic plan and emergency operations center are run in a virtual environment, and the operational plan is set up 1 week in advance. There are goals, strategic objectives, and a structured plan to meet within the 1-week timeframe. He added that city directors are part of the planning process and stated the care coordinator is the liaison for every senior facility in the city. She is in contact daily with each facility, to stay ahead of the virus getting into these populations. He pointed out there are currently no incidences of COVID- 19 in any of the St. Louis Park senior facilities. Fire Chief Koering added he is in daily contact with STEP, Park Nicollet Health Services, and Park Nicollet Foundation. Mr. Harmening is in contact with the chamber of commerce, while Ms. Sojourner stays in touch with the historically underserved populations in St. Louis Park, making sure there are no gaps and looking for resources. Fire Chief Koering stated Mr. Harmening sees the weekly action plan and signs off on it each week. He also noted a daily activity log is kept, in order to keep track of any costs associated with Covid-19 work, so as to keep a record for FEMA in order to receive reimbursements. They City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 are also tracking PPE for public safely needs, and to recover costs from FEMA. He stated as this all evolves, there may be a need for volunteers, donations, and the emergency plan will also look at how to approach this. Councilmember Kraft asked what FEMA reimburses to cities. Chief Koering explained anything related to COVID-19 that is above normal expenditure is documented, tracked, and submitted to FEMA for reimbursement. Councilmember Kraft asked how the city is doing so far on needs and tracking costs. Chief Koering stated the city is doing fine, doing a great job of planning and taking care of city needs. He added there is a number of growing community needs as well, such as food shelf needs and growing concerns on utility and rent bills. He noted as things move along, there will be a path to county and state resources to help with these needs. Councilmember Rog thanked the Fire Chief and staff for all they are doing, adding she is appreciative of the work both fire and police are involved in with the Orthodox Jewish community. She asked if any fire or police staff are in isolation or quarantine. Chief Koering stated not at this time. Councilmember Rog asked Chief Koering about the rec center being set aside as potential hospital space for Methodist Hospital. Chief Koering stated this was discussed earlier on when looking at potential city space for surge capacity at Methodist Hospital, for non COVID-19 patients. He noted this is a proactive preparedness measure, and if the space were needed, the ice could be removed quickly in order to house patients. He added the emergency management team continues to be in discussions with Park Nicollet on this issue. Councilmember Rog asked if the city is secure on PPE at this time. Chief Koering stated while there is a shortage across the US at this time of PPE, the fire department has a good inventory in place for their staff, which was left from the past, careful planning, and ordering ahead. He added the fire department continues to monitor the CDC and MHD guidelines for safety of firefighters. Councilmember Rog asked if this PPE supports Methodist Hospital at all. Chief Koering stated no, Park Nicollet Foundation (PNF) is conducting a PPE drive at their 3900 Building location on Excelsior Avenue and collecting PPE that goes to the MN Healthcare Consortium, where it is shared across the entire healthcare system in Minnesota. Councilmember Rog asked what other types of donations are currently needed in St. Louis Park. Chief Koering stated food and cash donations are needed for STEP and later, volunteers will be needed after the appropriate PPE is acquired. Councilmember Rog stated she was pleased to hear this and looks forward to safe ways for people to volunteer. Chief Koering added staff is working with the city’s volunteer coordinator to develop a list of volunteers, and residents can email the chief to be added to the list. Mayor Spano noted STEP does have sufficient food for the next two weeks and will accept cash donations. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 3 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 Councilmember Mavity stated she wants to be sure everything is being communicated to residents, so they hear about something, before they see it happening. Chief Koering stated communication with citizens will continue at all times, no matter what the incident. Councilmember Harris asked if the city is looking at where we are as compared to rest of the world and also where residents think we are and what is that. Chief Koering stated the police and fire departments are meeting people where they live, and getting feedback from them, while measuring all of this against what we are hearing in the news and in the world. He stated it seems in St. Louis Park, it does not feel as chaotic as in other places. While people are scared and apprehensive, they do feel the city is staying ahead of this and doing a great job. Councilmember Harris asked if the Good to be Home Program could be used for follow-up, or a virtual meeting for mental health and well-being. Chief Koering stated Good to be Home and CERT would not be appropriate as the folks who follow-up are not trained appropriately for COVID-19. He added Good to be Home and CERT visits add value, but are not a good fit right now, create another entry point, and possible exposure. Mayor Spano asked what tool is in place in the structured incident management plan for longer term planning, like a month or two months ahead. Chief Koering stated the incident action plan is guided for weeklong preparations and outside of that is work the directors and Mr. Harmening are doing. Mayor Spano asked how the team is doing emotionally, and how is morale currently. He noted where there is a high risk and high demand situation, it can wear on people overtime, and he asked staff to keep this in mind. Chief Koering stated the process and structure brings calm to the situation, and everyone has been accepting of the framework. He added the team is concerned but is working together very well. Chief Harcey stated the police took immediate steps to isolate patrols and shifts while having the minimum number of investigators working in the office, while others are working from home. He added the police department front desk is open. Chief Harcey added much work has been done with dispatch, and Edina will be back up if needed, along with Hennepin County. He noted they have a good plan in place to continue operations no matter what staffing levels are. He stated police are seeing calls for service at average, and police are no longer responding to upper respiratory or flu symptoms as fire is now handling all of this. He added there is a small increase in domestic disturbances, and increase in auto thefts, while there has been an increase in burglaries across Hennepin County. Chief Harcey added police are doing extra patrolling at religious institutions that are empty now, and construction sites, and the police received a lot of questions about the Governor’s executive order. He stated they are responding to these questions and on social media as well. Ms. Walsh stated signs have been added in all 52 park areas, encouraging distancing. Park structures have been closed and maintenance staff is running different shifts, so they maintain zero interaction with each other. All programming and events at the nature center have been City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 4 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 cancelled until May 15 for now, and the skate park and basketball courts are being monitored. She added there is much concern for the areas where kids are congregating. Skate parks are still open at this time and can remain open if they don’t get overcrowded. She stated staff is monitoring the situation. Councilmember Kraft noted in Edina, there are challenges with folks gathering, and Edina has issued a strong warning that they will enforce the misdemeanor. He asked if St. Louis Park is seeing the same kind of issues with gathering. Chief Harcey stated the Hennepin County chiefs have discussed this and everyone is on same page, with enforcement being a last option. He added this is voluntary compliance at this time. Councilmember Mohamed stated with the weather getting nicer and youth gathering at the park, it is a concern and also is a misdemeanor crime. She asked Chief Harcey to review the fine and process. Chief Harcey stated the misdemeanor crime is 90 days in jail and $1,000 fine. Councilmember Mohamed added there is a lot of misinformation on the stay at home orders and asked for clarification. Chief Harcey stated the Governor’s office issued an executive order for all citizens to stay at home, while 7 businesses and 35 job classifications that are exempt. He suggested folks look at the Governor’s website or call the police department for more information. Mr. Harmening added there is nothing in the Governor’s order about not walking or exercising but if people are congregating it’s an issue, and they must stay 6 feet apart. Councilmember Rog stated there will need to be messaging on the city’s stance on this and with people at parks, where to report sightings of congregating. She asked if the city phone app might be appropriate to notify about congregating. She added she is getting lots of questions from residents on this. Mr. Harmening noted that this has been a difficult question, adding that Edina has taken a more stringent line and actions, like fencing off park equipment, and not using fields and park facilities. He stated St. Louis Park can do some things to help lower congregating at parks, like putting fences around the skatepark and obstacles in it to make it harder for someone to use. Likewise, he added, all rims can be removed from basketball courts, and they can also be fenced in. He added, however, the police will not arrest for congregating. But if the council has guidance on this or if the city should be more proactive or stringent, they can direct this. Councilmember Rog stated she is not in favor of fencing in the park equipment. She asked if residents should call police if they see congregating. Mr. Harmening stated yes, they can call police on the non-emergency line. Chief Harcey noted the police non-emergency phone number is 952-924-2618. Councilmember Rog asked for some type of messaging on this to residents. She added she is concerned about the increase in domestic incidents. Chief Harcey stated there have been no arrests, and no domestic assaults, but the police work closely with Cornerstone and can get information out on social media about Cornerstone’s services. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 5 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 Mayor Spano added that distancing is a concern and when kids are done with spring break, they may be more compliant. Councilmember Harris asked if there is a city liaison who communicates with Perspectives about the uptick in verbal incidents. Chief Harcey stated there is a liaison that works with Perspectives, but there are no reports of increases at this time. Councilmember Harris added with regard to social distancing, perhaps the schools can help to get the message out to parents as well. Mr. Harmening stated staff is in communication with the school district ongoing and will follow up on this idea. Councilmember Brausen stated he has no issue at all with occasional group of kids getting together in the parks, adding he does not want to become a police state. He stated there is no perfect system to keep this issue in check, and the city is doing a good job of spreading the message about social distancing. He stated kids will congregate and a certain percentage will not comply, but if the vast majority do comply, we are doing our part to flatten the curve. Mayor Spano agreed it is a challenge, adding that Edina is taking a more aggressive stance. However, it is not more than strong words at this point. He stated in speaking with Edina Mayor Hovland, they are instituting counter clockwise movement on walking trails. He added he agrees broadly with the approach Police Chief Harcey is taking. Mr. Harmening noted also that Chief Harcey is working with the skateboarder’s social media page in getting the social distancing information out. Councilmember Mavity stated she agrees with Councilmember Brausen on this issue and as long as the police are handling this issue, she does not support escalating in any way. She added it might be helpful to create social media that is humorous, or a contest, that would appeal to folks about social distancing. Department updates Mr. Simon stated finance has been planning for COVID impacts, and not waiting until June to do planning and analysis, while also working to stay in front of the issue. He stated staff and the team is engaged, doing sensitivity analysis, and looking at impacts currently. Mr. Simon added staff is looking at recreation programs, and other outstanding expenses to help mitigate, as well as looking at building permits, tracking property taxes, and possible effects of delayed payment. He stated they are also reviewing capital expenditures and the bond market, noting that with interest rates so low, there is not a demand for municipal bonds currently. He stated they are also tracking costs for potential reimbursements and working closely with department directors on what can be delayed. Mr. Simon stated the council will be kept apprised and there will be more to come. Ms. Deno stated Mr. Bultema is currently working with Hennepin County on property values, while Ms. Kennedy is working as the assistant to Chief Koering, as well as on elections and City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 6 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 records. Ms. Solano is working with boards and commissions, while Ms. Sojourner is working on outreach, and Ms. Timpone continues her focus on city employees, support, families, and helping set up staff to work from home. Employee communications include daily meetings and updates with Mr. Harmening and keeping business going, while supporting staff well-being. Ms. Sojourner stated while the total community is extremely important, they are focusing on the historically underserved, reaching out, and connecting. She is connecting with stakeholders who work with those groups and neighborhood associations, on a weekly basis and with other racial equity folks in other cities. She noted St. Louis Park is a bit ahead of the curve. Ms. Sojourner stated she is hearing there is a huge fear of contracting COVID, personal economic challenges, job loss, rent, electricity, food shortage, concern about children and youth, distance learning, and keeping kids busy. She added there is an increase of concern for the mental health for both youth and parents. Ms. Sojourner added she’s had calls from community members who are undocumented and have less resources, and who may not have access to certain food shelves, are worried about getting tested, or no access to the stimulus package. Ms. Sojourner stated Ramadan starts at the end of April and she has heard a lot of people concerned about their celebrations. They are also working on getting messages out about completing the 2020 census. She stated there are concerns of anti-Asian racism and xenophobia, and staff is monitoring this, although nothing has been heard on this yet. Messages are going out on social media to folks about how to get help if they are experiencing any racism issues. Ms. Heiser stated the Governor’s order identifies construction as critical and essential work. She stated staff will finish pavement management projects, as well as sanitary sewer lining, curb and gutter projects, Bridgewater Bank, and the Dakota Bridge bikeway. She added some construction staff is working from home and some on site with physical distancing. She stated they will not engage any projects for 2021 at this time. Ms. Barton stated all of her staff is working from home except one, who is at Hamilton House. She noted the Governor has suspended all eviction actions in the state and information has been distributed to property owners to waive late fees and work with renters. She stated St. Louis Park is doing this as well with all public housing. All voucher and public housing tenants are able to get rent reductions whether or not their situation is COVID-related. Ms. Barton stated $108,000 has been allocated to STEP for rent assistance and COVID-related rent assistance and can be used by one household for 3 months in a row. She added staff has sent information to residents about resources available to them and is asking owners to also share this information with residents as well. Related to business assistance, Ms. Barton stated staff has a robust list of assistance for small businesses on the city website, and the city has suspended all enforcement actions related to temporary signs for small business. She added staff will mail a postcard to all businesses in the city notifying them of resources and leading them to the city website and also to a staff contact. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 7 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 She added staff will also call all St. Louis Park businesses to tell them about resources, and ask how the city can help them, while also directing them to the city website. She noted staff will continue with all planning and zoning as well through WebEx and zoom conferencing. Mr. Pires stated technology has worked on deployment for employees working remotely and also began staggering staff to have them work different shifts and distanced from others. He added technology staff offers remote support and responds to help desk calls. Mr. Pires noted staff and council will be using WebEx as the tool future meetings. Regular council meetings will continue to be live streamed on Channel 17. He stated the first council meeting by WebEx will be held April 6, and the public hearing component will be added to the April 15 meeting. Mr. Pires stated the city has a dedicated webpage for COVID-19 and is working with other city departments to publicize cancelled events. He added his staff is also working collaboratively with other cities. Mr. Hoffman stated the Governor’s order allows continuing of inspections and permits, adding he has inspectors work both on site and is exploring doing video inspections as well. He stated inspectors are using PPE if necessary and all rental and business inspections have been stopped, with only essential ones being conducted, related to real estate and sales. Mr. Hoffman added the sustainability staff is working from home, and facilities and maintenance staff are disinfecting buildings, and wiping down surfaces to reduce contamination. He added maintenance staff is on rotating shifts as well. Councilmember Kraft asked how much of the city’s budget is at risk, and what is the best-case scenario. Mr. Simon stated the directors are finalizing numbers currently, and it will be presented to Mr. Harmening soon. He stated there may be budget amendments, and after more data is available, staff will be able to make estimates. Councilmember Kraft asked what happened with tax delinquencies in 2008. Mr. Simon stated he will look into that, but noted tax payments come in throughout the year, and even if late, will still be coming in. Councilmember Mohamed stated it is important for the city to be sympathetic for people’s struggles. She asked how lenient the city will be with utility payments and rents. Ms. Barton stated at city-owned properties, in public housing units, the city will work with tenants on payment plans, and adjusting rents, as well as paying renter’s utilities. She added they are encouraging owners to also work with renters on waiving fees and providing rent assistance for 3 months through STEP. Councilmember Mohamed asked what the city is recommending related to Ramadan, as it can get overly crowded during the celebrations. She noted many residents will go to Minnetonka and Minneapolis mosques for the celebrations. Ms. Sojourner stated staff is watching and waiting on Ramadan currently, and educating the Islamic communities, as well as all faith communities, about social distancing. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 8 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 Councilmember Rog asked if there are any updates on election planning. Ms. Deno stated Ms. Kennedy is in touch with Hennepin County and the Secretary of State’s office and there is more to come on this related to what is decided on various levels. Councilmember Rog asked if there would be an extra cost to the city if we change the way our elections are done. Ms. Deno stated it would depend on whether there were more mailings involved, and noted Ms. Kennedy is gathering information and will advise on this soon. Councilmember Rog asked if the city is taking direction from the Governor and President, putting the stay at home orders out to April 30, and if the city is looking at 30 days or more. Chief Koering stated he does not have an answer to that but would expect the Governor to extend the stay at home orders to the end of April, or into May. Councilmember Rog asked how city businesses are doing, if take out is going well for restaurants, and if any layoffs have occurred. Ms. Barton stated some restaurants have had to let staff go, while some are doing curbside delivery. She noted Punchbowl Social laid off their entire staff and pointed out statistics from DEED will be 2 months behind. Councilmember Mavity stated the plans of the finance department make sense and the city should continue forward as outlined. She stated the city will have revenue and higher costs, which is cause for concern, especially when hearing health insurance costs might go up 40% next year. She stated they will need to think hard about what that will mean for the city and need to consider not raising taxes next year. Councilmember Mavity added the city might need to put some discretionary costs on hold and be extra cautious. She added the council will need to think hard on what priorities will be, while there will not be as much flexibility as in the past. Councilmember Mavity stated in terms of community development, and with unemployment claims, if 20-40% of folks cannot pay rent, that impacts housing availability, and tenants will ultimately be responsible for rent that is not paid. She added more community block grant funding will be available and the state may do something, but for folks who are not receiving vouchers now, they don’t have a safety net. Councilmember Mavity noted the city will need to educate tenants they still need to pay rent, as well as work with landlords on payment structures for renters. She added in the end, there could be massive buildings in the city that will foreclose, with others coming in to purchase them. Councilmember Mavity stated it will be important to communicate that the city is open for business, and that the city wants developers to be doing projects in St. Louis Park, which would be helpful to the city’s economy. She added this is a time to think about how to do the city’s work differently, resources and planning. Councilmember Harris stated this is a marathon, not a sprint, and is a very unusual time. She stated our focus should be on our departments, our staff, across teams, and the underserved. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 9 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 She added she would like to see a renewed focus on communication conveying St. Louis Park is a “people first” community, and to share in Park Perspectives how we are connecting with the underserved, working on reducing costs, and thinking about residents who are newly unemployed. She added this will be important and valuable in the coming months and will provide a connection for folks to reach out to the city in ways they haven’t in the past. Councilmember Harris asked about postponement of projects to 2021 and if those are non- essential projects, she is inclined to hold off. She added the city may want to hold off on bikeways and sidewalks for 1 year and asked how folks are being notified about rental adjustments. Ms. Barton stated all tenants in public housing or who have housing vouchers were sent direct mailings from the city on the process and resources. She added if residents know they have a change in income they may notify staff and their rent will be adjusted accordingly. Councilmember Harris stated she was glad to hear that $108,000 will go to STEP and asked if this will provide a stop gap for STEP. Ms. Barton stated this is the number STEP provided to the city, which would cover a 4-month period. She stated the city will continue to evaluate this with STEP over time, and the amount will increase, if needed. Councilmember Harris stated she is concerned folks don’t know to go to STEP if they need help and asked how folks can become aware. Ms. Barton stated the city has sent letters and emails to all property owners in the city telling them about the resources and asking them to tell their renters as well. It has also been added on social media and in Park Perspectives. Councilmember Harris asked if the two affordable housing projects, in the former Prince of Peace location and at UCC, will still move forward. Ms. Barton stated UCC is fast-tracking their project and moving ahead with Project for Pride in Living. She stated the Common Bond project with Prince of Peace will happen further in the future. Councilmember Brausen thanked staff for all their work, and stated he is not going to ask staff to speculate on the future. He did ask if potholes are getting fixed. Ms. Walsh stated yes and to let her know if any problem potholes need filling. Councilmember Brausen asked if the Dakota Bridge project is in danger of losing federal funds. Ms. Heiser stated the project is on track and staff will continue to monitor it. Councilmember Brausen added he appreciates Mr. Simon and staff’s forward thinking on the budget and the communications area is doing a great job. He asked Ms. Smith if more press releases could be sent to the Sun Sailor so they know we are open for business and where to get help around town. He stated he is proud of the city’s effort in all of this. Councilmember Mohamed added St. Louis Park is far ahead of what other cities are doing around the nation, in these uncertain times. She stated she was glad for this update and that things were put in perspective for her, adding she is glad to be part of this city. She commented that she has been laid off, and half of her family was laid off, and they don’t know what will happen, but she thanked staff for their hard work, and hopes everyone can make it through this together. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 3b) Page 10 Title: Study session minutes of March 30, 2020 Mayor Spano stated he has been assured that SWLRT will continue to move forward with no problem. He agreed that the city is only one month into this and while it is good to plan related to financial impacts, he doesn’t think decisions should be made for next year as yet. Mayor Spano added he will send a resource list to Ms. Sojourner and Mr. Harmening related to what other cities are doing, and he will share this with the council as well. Mayor Spano thanked Ms. Barton and staff for calling every business in the city and for their tremendous level of service. He asked Mr. Mattick if he is hearing about any emerging legal issues at this point. Mr. Mattick stated he has seen a lot of labor issues at this point, and some issues on planning and zoning, with the 60-day rule, but nothing else yet. Mayor Spano asked if Ms. Barton is on the calls with DEED. Ms. Barton stated she is, and Mr. Harmening is also. Mayor Spano noted the website Criticalsectors@state.mn.us where folks can sign-up if they want to be on list of essential business. Communications/meeting check-in (verbal) Mr. Harmening stated he will want the council to discuss understanding what the city’s focus and priorities should be right now, in terms of business. He stated at the April 13 meeting there will be another update on COVID. Councilmember Rog commended Ms. Smith for the city’s excellent communications and social media postings. She asked how the council can best be of service to the community now. Mr. Harmening stated the council has been incredibly supportive over the last three weeks, and staff truly appreciates it so much. He stated the council is the eyes and ears of the community and asked them to watch out for folks in their neighborhoods, which is very valuable. Councilmember Kraft noted the number one issue in all of this is making sure folks in the community have food and are able to handle their rental issues. He asked if it is necessary for staff to do another COVID update to the council in two weeks. Mayor Spano stated he views this report as a necessary pit stop and getting an update is important for the council. Mr. Harmening added staff needs to give council the full picture on how this is being handled from an operations perspective, and how the city is working to stay ahead of this. He noted the next report will be more big-picture, but that depends on what happens in the next two weeks. The meeting adjourned at 10:25 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 4a Executive summary Title: Approval of city disbursements Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is categorized as a Required Action** •Motion to accept for filing city disbursement claims for the period of March 28, through April 24, 2020. Policy consideration: Does the city council desire to approve city disbursements in accordance with Section 6.11 – Disbursements – How Made, of the City’s Charter? Summary: The Finance Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the city council to review and approve. The attached reports show both City disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable. Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of the information follows the city’s charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: City disbursements Prepared by: Kari Mahan, accounting clerk Reviewed by: Tim Simon, chief financial officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 111.80 EARL F ANDERSEN INC DAMAGE REPAIR SMALL TOOLS 111.80 1,246.613D SPECIALTIES INC.DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,246.61 295.91A-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 295.91 900.00ACACIA ARCHITECTS LLC MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 900.00 22,283.53ACCELA INC #774375 TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 22,283.53 46.50ACCOUNTEMPSWATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 46.50SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 46.50SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 46.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 186.00 30,694.00ACE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 345.00REC CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1,436.85REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 988.35REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 33,464.20 654.76ACME TOOLS DAMAGE REPAIR SMALL TOOLS 654.76 2,500.00ACROSS THE STREET PRODUCTIONS OPERATIONS TRAINING 2,500.00 495.60ACTION FASTENINGS INC INSTALLATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 495.60 45.00ADDONIZIO KRISTEN DANCE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 2,555.00ADELMANN JACKIE COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,555.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 2 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 21,393.23ADVANCED ENG & ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 21,393.21SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 21,393.20STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 64,179.64 4,329.00AEM FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS, LLC.FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 721.50WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 721.50SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 721.50SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 721.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,215.00 560.00ALL CITY ELEVATOR INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 560.00 645.00ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 2,470.00MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 5,052.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,167.00 2,613.30ALLSTREAMIT G & A TELEPHONE 2,613.30 222.15-AMERECT, INC.GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 4,443.00GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 4,220.85 214.00AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 214.00 18.00AMOS LAURIE PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 1,185.47ANCHOR SCIENTIFIC INC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,185.47 59.26ANDERSON HANNA FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 59.26 40.63ANDREINI MAGAN BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 3 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 3Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 40.63 4.00ANDRESS MARGO PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 4.00 1.00APPLIANCE CONNECTIONS BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 65.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 66.00 379.56APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 379.56 2,807.59ASPEN MILLS OPERATIONS UNIFORMS 2,807.59 422.50ASSOCIATED CLINIC OF PSYCHOLOGY FACILITY ROOM RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 422.50 66.51AT&T MOBILITY CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT 66.51 1,800.98ATIR ELECTRIC CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,800.98 97.76AUTOWASH SYSTEMS INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 97.76 47,686.00AX TC INDUSTRIAL III L.P.RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 47,686.00 127.00BACON ASHLY PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 480.00BARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 480.00 120.00BARTO SARAH WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 120.00 10.00BARTON SAND & GRAVEL CO TREE MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 4 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 4Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 279.30BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 279.30 2,167.50BERGERSON CASWELL INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,167.50 219.17BESSNER LORI GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 219.17 5,000.00BIALON NICHOLAS ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 5,000.00 503.94BLACKBURN MFG. CO WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 503.94 127.00BLODGETT ERIC PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 239.94BLUE TARP FINANCIAL INC ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 239.94 4.00BOHMANN KIRA SPECIAL EVENTS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 156.00 65.00BOHROD JODI BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 65.00BOLAND AMANDA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 20.00BOLINGER JACOB OPERATIONS TRAINING 20.00 50.00BORMANN REBECCA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 452.72BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,707.65OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 5 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 5Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,160.37 866.92BRAEMAR CITY OF LAKES FSC ICE RENTAL NON-TAXABLE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 866.92 60.00BREDENBERG, JASON BLDG & ENERGY G & A LICENSES 60.00 127.00BREKKE DEBBIE PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 65.00BROXEY DANIELLE BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 432.50BUSINESS ESSENTIALS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 432.50 45.00BUTTERFIELD ABBI FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 2,964.00CALHOUN TOWERS LLC OPERATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 2,964.00 300.00CAMPUZANO EMELINA PARK BUILDINGS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 300.00 1,901.73CANON FINANCIAL IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,901.73 8,332.00CARE RESOURCE CONNECTION OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8,332.00 16,879.52CARGILL, INC.SANDING/SALTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 16,879.52 6,877.15CDW GOVERNMENT INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 6,877.15 7,814.43CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS 119.19SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS 5,431.74REC CENTER BUILDING HEATING GAS City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 6 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 6Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 13,365.36 5,210.00CENTRAL PENSION FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT OTHER RETIREMENT 5,210.00 261.60CENTURY LINK CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 261.60 127.00CHAFFEE BRITNEY PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 450.00CHEF MARSHALL O'BRIEN LLC OPERATIONS TRAINING 450.00 500.00CHUXLARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE GENERAL SUPPLIES 563.50REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,063.50 96.40CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 197.24FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 506.89WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 19.56REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 203.98VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,024.07 158.28CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 214.70GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT 715.18ADMINISTRATION G & A SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 501.60ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 8.25ADMINISTRATION G & A POSTAGE 384.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 4,775.40ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 409.80ADMINISTRATION G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 923.53ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE 547.70RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 68.85RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A MEETING EXPENSE 4.23HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES 545.91HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 60.68HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 156.77HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 912.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 7 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 7Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 743.94HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING 4.96IT G & A TRAINING 39.00ASSESSING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 280.00FINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 30.00FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 75.26COMM DEV PLANNING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 98.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING 595.02FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 640.00FACILITIES MCTE G & A TRAINING 90.45POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 37.62POLICE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,214.77POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 50.00POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 313.00POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT 204.20POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 46.55POLICE G & A POSTAGE 104.94POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 590.00POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 3,915.63POLICE G & A TRAINING 120.00POLICE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 592.52POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE 49.99E-911 PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 111.75OPERATIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 403.65OPERATIONSFIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 929.45OPERATIONSOPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,914.09OPERATIONSSMALL TOOLS 154.96OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING 41.85OPERATIONSREPAIRS 13.97OPERATIONSSUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 1,724.58OPERATIONSTRAINING 4,947.07OPERATIONSSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 40.18SUSTAINABILITY G&A TRAINING 30.00SUSTAINABILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 19.33ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 26.95ENGINEERING G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 62.64PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 17.18PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A MEETING EXPENSE 470.44ROUTINE MAINTENANCE LICENSES 25.00TRAININGSEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 885.12CABLE TV G & A OTHER 63.70CABLE TV G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 8 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 8Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 792.47WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 660.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 29.50WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING 321.00SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 174.67SOLID WASTE G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 75.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1,000.35MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 14.60ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 959.84ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING 1,000.00ADULT PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 607.30LITTLE TOT PLAYTIME ADVERTISING 1,796.34LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE GENERAL SUPPLIES 267.38LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE ADVERTISING 13.97PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 200.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING 139.95PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 649.85PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 206.76NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 450.00NATURAL RESOURCES G & A TRAINING 603.94WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 50.57FAMILY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 629.63REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,626.90REC CENTER BUILDING TRAINING 88.00AQUATIC PARK G & A POSTAGE 550.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A TRAINING 40.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 100.00PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE TRAINING 949.01GENERAL REPAIR SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 47,101.67 850.00CITY OF ANNANDALE POLICE G & A TRAINING 850.00 254.00CLAPSHAW ERIC PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 254.00 1,180.55CLAREY'S SAFETY EQUIPMENT INC OPERATIONS TRAINING 1,180.55 139.00COHEN DIANA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 139.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 9 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 9Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 13,884.42COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES 13,884.42 754.56COLLINS ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION CO WIRING REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 776.70SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,357.10UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 2,888.36 27.00COLLINS MARY FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 27.00 126.18COMCASTOPERATIONSEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 106.34CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 29.47REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 261.99 50.70CONDIT-SHRESTHA KELLY DANCE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.70 3,042.88CORE & MAIN LP WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 3,042.88 2,571.00CORPORATE MECHANICAL REC CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 7,841.09REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 10,412.09 30.00COSTCO WHOLESALE MEMBERSHIP PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 150.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 120.00WESTWOOD G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 60.00AQUATIC PARK G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 360.00 2,758.40COUGHLIN, JUDY FITNESS PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,758.40 10,970.00COVERALL OF THE TWIN CITIES FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,970.00 365.56CROWN MARKING INC.COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 365.56 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 10 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 10Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 5,836.20DALCO ENTERPRISES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 5,836.20 127.00DAVENPORT KATE PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 127.00DAY CHRIS PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 485.31DELEGARD TOOL CO VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 485.31 60.00DENHAM MELISSA WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 34.98DENO NANCY FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 34.98 640.00DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 640.00 30,979.75DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 30,979.75 8,983.99DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 8,983.99 629.36DH ATHLETICS LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 629.36 42,000.00DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 42,000.00 127.00DOBBERKE KRISTIN PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 23,313.97DO-GOOD.BIZ INC COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE 125.00COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 23,438.97 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 11 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 11Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 127.00DREW MOLLY PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 21.00DRUCK ANNE MARIE PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 21.00 36.00DUNN ANGELA FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 36.00 930.00-EBERT CONSTRUCTION GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 18,600.00GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 17,670.00 267.75ECM PUBLISHERS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES 267.75 3,375.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ESCROWS Dunn Brothers Coffee 2,325.00ESCROWSOPPIDAN - BALLY'S SITE 147.50ESCROWSPLACE 1,800.00ESCROWS 397.50BRIDGWALK HIA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 632.50STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8,677.50 290.93EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 290.93 323.57EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 19,103.61CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 19,427.18 5,163.99ENTERPRISE FM TRUST EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT RENTAL EQUIPMENT 5,163.99 65.00EPP SAWYER BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 21.00EWELL JULIA PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 21.00 458.04FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 12 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 12Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 22.98VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 481.02 288.73FASTENAL COMPANY OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 118.42OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING 59.55INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 209.36WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS 169.66SEWER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 845.72 98.00FEDER JOEL TUESDAY TURTLES REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 98.00 6,213.94FERGUSON WATERWORKS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 6,213.94 54.20FERRELLGASGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 143.87ARENA MAINTENANCE MOTOR FUELS 198.07 32.00FESLER SARAH FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 32.00 837.91FINANCE & COMMERCE, INC.STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 837.91 140.27FIRST ADVANTAGE HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 140.27 278.00FISCHER NICOLE PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 278.00 60.00FISHER KATHRYNE WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 254.00FLEMING JESSICA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 254.00 187.50FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 187.50 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 13 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 13Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 59.26FONTAINE ANN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 59.26 149.00FORKLIFTS OF MN INC.PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 149.00 65.00FOSTER, TRISH BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 225.00FRAASCH KARL GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 13.58FRATTALONE'S/ST. LOUIS PARK RELAMPING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1.60REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 15.18 873.21FUN EXPRESS HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 873.21 1,225.75GALLS, LLC - DBA UNIFORMS UNLIMITED POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,225.75 50.00GAVIN BREE BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 8,691.00-GENERAL SHEET METAL COMPANY, LLC. GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 173,800.00GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 165,109.00 127.00GERBER ADRIA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 65.00GINNIS BRIDGET BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 73.00GLAESEMAN COURTNEY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 73.00 50.00GLAPA SHAWN OPERATIONS TRAINING 50.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 14 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 14Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1.03GO PERMITS LLC BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 88.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 89.03 20.00GOLDBERGER EARL FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.00WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 127.00GOLDSTEN MICHELLE PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 3,500.00GOODPOINTE TECHNOLOGY INC PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,500.00 465.00GRAFIX SHOPPE CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 465.00 1,303.99GRAINGER INC, WW FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,303.99 14,311.25GRANICUSCOMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 7,039.19CABLE TV G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 21,350.44 10.00GRAY CATHY ADULT PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 135.02GRAY DARIUS RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 634.78RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A MEETING EXPENSE 769.80 417.04GS DIRECT, INC.COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 417.04 210.00GUESEB BATE VOLLEYBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 210.00 920.55HACH CO WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 920.55 87.75HALLOCK COMPANY INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 15 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 15Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 87.75 50.00HANGEBRAUCK KRISTIN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 127.00HARRINGTON JENNY PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 199.00HAVISPOLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES 199.00 20,701.85HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 20,701.85 50.00HAYES KELLY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 55.00HEALTHPARTNERSHUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,087.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 1,142.00 52.00HEARTH & HOME TECHNOLOGIES BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 60.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL 112.00 696.00HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 4,203.80POLICE G & A JAIL/DETENTION SERVICES 2,482.92OPERATIONSRADIO COMMUNICATIONS 12.00HIA ADMIN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,394.72 16,376.00HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE POLICE G & A TRAINING 16,376.00 500.00HERBERT DEREK ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 500.00 254.00HERNANDEZ SHANNON PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 254.00 60.99HIRSHFIELDSMUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 16 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 16Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 60.99 21.00HITCHINGS ALEXIA PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 21.00 95.83HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 718.24WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 524.66PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 34.97PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SMALL TOOLS 111.89PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 23.02PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 2.36PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT MAINTENAN GENERAL SUPPLIES 94.60REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 28.94VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,634.51 127.00HORTON CHELSEA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 65.00HOWARD STEVEN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 5.00HUBMAYR YVONNE ADULT PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.00 8.00HUGHES CHARLENE SPECIAL EVENTS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 50.00HULKE MANDY LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 24.00HUMLICEK- SPINDLER GRIFFIN PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 24.00 118.14ICCBLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 118.14 50.00ICE ERIC GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 25.00ICE SPORTS INDUSTRY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 17 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 17Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 25.00 1,409.00IDEAL SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,409.00 2,080.00IMO CONSULTING GROUP, INC.STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,080.00 725.12IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 725.12SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 725.12SOLID WASTE G&A POSTAGE 725.12STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 2,900.48 1,172.37INDELCOWATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,172.37 8,400.00INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 283 RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 8,400.00 31.28INTERGRATED FIRE & SECURITY BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 31.28 190.00INTL ASSOCIATION OF ARSON INVESTIGATORS OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 190.00 32.66INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 32.66 742.50ISD 273 SCHOOLS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 742.50 184.88I-STATE TRUCK CENTER GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 184.88 525.00ITERIS INC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 525.00 78.08J. H. LARSON CO.FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 75.32WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 114.11WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 18 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 18Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 267.51 19.50JACHNYCKY FRANCIS FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 19.50 165.00JACK MCCLARD & ASSOCIATES VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 165.00 127.00JANS LEXIE PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 190.00JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS 2,326.30OPERATIONSPROTECTIVE CLOTHING 2,516.30 12.14JERRY'S HARDWARE POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 35.21WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 14.85LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE GENERAL SUPPLIES 62.20 10.00KEIL KRISTOPHER PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 50.00KELLY ANNA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 650.00KENNEDY & GRAVEN ESCROWS Dunn Brothers Coffee 480.00ESCROWSPLACE 1,750.00ESCROWS 2,880.00 8.00KENNEY JESSICA PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 1,370.40KILLMER ELECTRIC CO INC UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 1,370.40 90,244.99KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,979.98PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,288.57WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,346.48STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 19 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 19Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 106,860.02 65.00KINNEBERG SARAH BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 50.00KISS SANDOR GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 50.00KLEFSAAS, MAGGIE BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 970.00KNO2, LLC.OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 970.00 45.00KOZICKI EMILY DANCE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 18.00KRAEMER KATHLEEN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 30.00KRAFT JESSICA WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 30.00 300.00KRAMER- JOHNSON JEAN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 300.00 30.00KRESLINS KATHRYN WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 30.00 858.00KRISS PREMIUM PRODUCTS INC REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 858.00 56.00LAUMANN, JOHN WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES 56.00 35.00LAZAR EMILY FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00PRESCHOOLREFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 43.00 4,470.75LEAGUE OF MN CITIES INSURANCE TRUST P&C UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 4,470.75 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 20 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 20Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 8.00LEE ROBYN SPECIAL EVENTS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 705.00LEGEND TECHNICAL SERVICES REILLY G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 705.00 50.00LENZMEIER JACOB LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 21.00LESZAYOVA VERONIKA PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 21.00 35.00LEVINSON DANA WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 35.00 20.00LEVY JODY FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 450.38-LIFESAVER FIRE PROTECTION GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 9,007.60GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 8,557.22 725.00LIONSGATE ACADEMY FACILITY ROOM RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 725.00 1,182.53LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 1,182.53 1,618.07LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES 1,618.07 1,688.08LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,688.08 16.00LOFTNESS MAREN FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 16.00 37,483.00LOGISIT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 3,976.25ASSESSING G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 750.00CABLE TV G & A CAPITAL REPLACEMENT FUND City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 21 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 21Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 17,007.19TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 59,216.44 50.70LONSBURY KRISTIN DANCE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.70 225.00LOON ARCHITECTS MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 1.00LOUIE'S PLUMBING CO.BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 65.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 66.00 50.00LUND JANET LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 599.12MACQUEEN EMERGENCY GROUP OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS 599.12 398.57MACQUEEN EQUIP CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 64.83SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 463.40 127.00MAGGIOTTO REED PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 254.00MAIER PAMELA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 254.00 50.00MAISTROVICH SARAH BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 127.00MALOVRH ADAM PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 10,485.67MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY OF GAINSVILLE, INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 10,485.67 2,690.00MARIE RIDGEWAY LICSW LLC POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,690.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 22 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 22Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 50.00MARTENS BRAD LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 130.00MASLOWSKI SARAH BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 130.00 195.00MASTER TECHNOLOGY GROUP TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 195.00 34.98MAYER JANE FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 34.98 30.00MCCABE TARA WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 30.00 29.75MCMONIGAL, MEG COMM DEV PLANNING G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 29.75 122,000.00MCPHILLIPS BROS ROOFING COMPANY WATER UTILITY G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 122,000.00 34.98MCQUEEN HEATHER FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 34.98 188.19MEDICAL MEGA OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 188.19 105.52MENARDSFACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 71.76ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 28.14WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 13.85PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 39.86WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 259.13 375.00METRO BLOOMS STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 375.00 54,123.30METROPOLITAN COUNCIL BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 342,225.95OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 396,349.25 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 23 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 23Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 490.56MICRO CENTER IT G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 490.56 105.00MIDWEST PLAYGROUND CONTRACTORS INC. AQUATIC PARK BUDGET MAINTENANCE 105.00 127.00MILLER RALEIGH PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 469.95MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT WAGE GARNISHMENTS 469.95 20,000.00MINNESOTA NATIVE LANDSCAPES PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 5,609.00INVASIVE PLANT MGMT/RESTORATIO OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 25,609.00 1,360.00MINNESOTA SEARCHLIGHT & BALLOONS ADMINISTRATION G & A RENTAL EQUIPMENT 1,360.00 50.00MINUTEMAN PRESS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 50.00 200.00MN DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 249.03MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 249.03 3,000.00MN DNR ECO-WATER-RES STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,000.00 590.00MOBOTREXDAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 590.00 250.00MOLLICKS CARL GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 250.00 334.00MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 334.00 127.00MOZENA KATHERINE PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 24 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 24Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 127.00 190.00MR CUTTING EDGE REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 190.00 1,600.00MRA-THE MANAGEMENT ASSOC HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 1,600.00 67.00MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.SNOW PLOWING EQUIPMENT PARTS 219.72VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 286.72 8.00MURPHY JULIE PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 65.00MUTCHLER SARA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 149.00MVTL LABORATORIES REILLY G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 149.00 1,327.68NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 18.04SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 97.27WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 171.79VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 164.74VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SMALL TOOLS 74.50GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,854.02 65.00NATZEL STACY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 287.08ND CHILD SUPPORT DIVISION EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT WAGE GARNISHMENTS 287.08 72.00NELSON DAVID FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 72.00 65.00NEWHALL KELLY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 25 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 25Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1.00NOAH ACQUSITIONS, LLC.BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 100.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 101.00 787.80NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 200.00REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 987.80 39.00NORDSTROM TRACY FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 39.00 20.00NORDSTROM, TIM OPERATIONS TRAINING 20.00 381.00NORTHERN AIRE POOLS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 381.00 150.70NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 150.70 8,900.00NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 8,900.00 16,527.52NYSTROM PUBLISHING COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 16,527.52 20.00OBERSCHMID BRIAN OPERATIONS TRAINING 20.00 20.00OELHAFEN JIM OPERATIONS TRAINING 20.00 79.66OFFICE DEPOT COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 80.26COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 50.43FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 115.28OPERATIONSOFFICE SUPPLIES 189.92BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 172.88PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 92.11ENGINEERING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 59.70PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 59.70WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 26 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 26Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 59.70SOLID WASTE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 58.70ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 62.45WESTWOOD G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 59.70VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,140.49 100.00OFFICE TEAM COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 100.00 275.00OGRADY KEVIN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 275.00 127.00OGREN HEATHER PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 115.00OLEISKY ANDREA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 115.00 360.01OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 360.01 249.50ON SITE SANITATION FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 105.50OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 355.00 185.94O'REILLY FIRST CALL GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 185.94 10.00OSTFIELD SUE FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 907.40OVERHEAD DOOR CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 907.40 228.32OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 228.32 210.00PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC REILLY G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 210.00 PARK ADAM TRANSPORTATION LACROSSE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 27 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 27Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 641.61WESTWOOD G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 641.61 278.00PARK NICOLE PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 24.00PRESCHOOLREFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 302.00 148,800.00PARK NICOLLET METHODIST HOSPITAL RIGHT-OF-WAY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 148,800.00 50.00PAVLIK, JULIE BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 18.00PECK JW FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 21,028.57-PELLA NORTHLAND GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 420,571.35GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 399,542.78 430.00PERO JOHN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 430.00 5,000.00PETTERSEN ADAM ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 5,000.00 27.00PFEFFER NICOLE FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 27.00 2,726.55PFM ASSET MANAGEMENT CITY POOLED INVESTMENTS BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 2,726.55 10.00PINNACLE WALL SYSTEMS, INC.BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 602.25BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 612.25 63.00PIPER KRISTEN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 63.00 480.00PLEGGENKUHLE NANCY GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 480.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 28 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 28Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 45.00POND VICKI FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 60.00POTTER LUC WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 5,000.00PRECISE MRM LLC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 996.20SNOW PLOWING EQUIPMENT PARTS 5,996.20 320.34PREMIUM WATERS INC OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 320.34 500.00-PROTOUCH PAINTING, INC.GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 10,000.00GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 9,500.00 139.00PROVUS DANA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 139.00 1,065.00PUMP & METER SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,090.00BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 2,155.00 161,600.00QUEST PROPERTIES, INC.RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 161,600.00 396.35R & R SPECIALTIES REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 396.35 5,910.00RAINBOW LAWNCARE SSD #5 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 75,000.00TREE TRIMMING/PRUNING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 80,910.00 125.00-RAM CONSTRUCTION SERVICES OF MINNESOTA GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 2,500.00GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 2,375.00 60.00RAMIREZ SHELLY WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 29 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 29Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 240.60RANALLO APRIL GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 240.60 8,458.70RANDY'S ENVIORMENTAL SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 4,773.38REC CENTER BUILDING GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 13,232.08 200.00RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 953.45BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,153.45 475.00REISE DEREK GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 475.00 65.00REUBEN BRADY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 250.00REX KAREN & ED GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 250.00 50.00RICHARDSON BLACKWELL KELSEY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 18.00RICKERT SUSAN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 919.53RICOH USA INC IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 919.53 15.00RIES CALIE FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 44.75RJM CONSTRUCTION LLC BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 59,679.84GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 59,724.59 994.14ROBERT B HILL CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 994.14 7,092.39ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 30 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 30Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 7,092.39 25.00RODRIGUEZ ANTONIO OPERATIONS TRAINING 25.00 170.51ROSEVILLE MIDWAY FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 44,803.20CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 44,973.71 15.00ROY SUMAN OPERATIONS TRAINING 15.00 3,600.00RTVISION INC ENGINEERING G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 3,600.00 11,927.10SAFEASSURE CONSULTANTS INC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,927.10 60.00SAMSONAVA TATSIANA WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 152.60SCHAAKE COMPANY, AJ HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 152.60 8.00SCHAEDLER KATY SPECIAL EVENTS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 127.00SCHELLHAAS SAMANTHA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 199.50SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO.PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 199.50 1,807.52SCHMITZ AMBER INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,807.52 24.00SCHMITZ CARRIE PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 24.00 375.00SCHWALBACH CLAIRE PARK BUILDINGS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 375.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 31 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 31Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 139.00SCHWEIGERT ANNA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 139.00 8.00SCROGGINS JULIE PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 65.00SEIWERT LAURA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 20.00SELBY KATIE FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 45.00SETS DESIGN INC.POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT 45.00 379.52-SHAW STEWARD LUMBER COMPANY GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 7,590.40GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 7,210.88 12,524.00SHAWN, JACK BASKETBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12,524.00 85,072.60SHITECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 85,072.60 3,710.60SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, INC.ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,375.58STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 909.90STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 5,996.08 245.00SIDAL CROSSROADS CO. LLC.GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT 245.00 50.00SIELEMAN STEWART BLDG & ENERGY G & A 1&2 SINGLE FAM. RENTAL 50.00 59.00SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 59.00 1,000.00SIMONETT JEFFERY ESCROWS PMC ESCROW City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 32 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 32Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,000.00 5.00SIPKINS ALISON ADULT PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.00 37.48SKALLET, DAVID BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 37.48 72.00SKELLY EDWARD FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 72.00 127.00SLAWSON MARIT PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 5,500.00SPJ PROPERTIES ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 5,500.00 492.97-SPLIT ROCK STUDIOS GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 9,859.39GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 9,366.42 127.00SPORS KELLY PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 33.66SPS COMPANIES INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 33.66 1,710.45SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,710.45 14,979.00ST CROIX RECREATION FUN PLAYGROUNDS INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 14,979.00 65.00STANGL, MATT BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 30.00STARR REBECCA WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 30.00 3,185.00-STERN DRYWALL, INC.GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 63,700.00GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 33 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 33Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 60,515.00 1.00STICKNEY JACOB BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 65.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 66.00 50.00STRASSER SANTIAGO BLDG & ENERGY G & A 1&2 SINGLE FAM. RENTAL 50.00 19,105.16STREICHER'S POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 198.99POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT 19,304.15 42.00SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 42.00 47,896.93SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC REILLY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 47,896.93 1,002.79SUNBELT RENTALS INC RECREATION OUTDOOR CENTER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,002.79 529.00TACTICAL ADVANTAGE POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT 529.00 1.25TADWALD JOHN BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 38.50BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 110.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 149.75 180.00TAPCOSYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 180.00 65.00TATE SARAH BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 79.98TELELANGUAGE INC ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 79.98 4,159.19-TELEMETRY & PROCESS CONTROL, INC. WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET RETAINAGE PAYABLE 27,728.02WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 34 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 34Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 27,728.03SEWER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 27,728.03STORM WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 79,024.89 18.00TEMPLE JEANNE FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 4,140.00THE BUSKE GROUP CABLE TV G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,140.00 732.58THE MPX GROUP COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 732.58 119.01THE SHERWINN WILLIAMS CO PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 946.64REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,065.65 366.98THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO GRAFFITI CONTROL GENERAL SUPPLIES 366.98 302.00THE SIGN PRODUCERS FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 302.00 227.08THE STANDARD ADMINISTRATION G & A LIFE INSURANCE 232.76ADMINISTRATION G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 67.82RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A LIFE INSURANCE 66.48RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 179.58HUMAN RESOURCES LIFE INSURANCE 186.28HUMAN RESOURCES LONG TERM DISABILITY 127.50COMM & MARKETING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 125.26COMM & MARKETING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 233.42IT G & A LIFE INSURANCE 255.40IT G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 217.68ASSESSING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 214.00ASSESSING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 207.78FINANCE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 206.92FINANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 578.10COMM DEV G & A LIFE INSURANCE 573.02COMM DEV G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 139.20FACILITIES MCTE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 136.56FACILITIES MCTE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 35 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 35Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,137.03POLICE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 2,103.20POLICE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 218.44COMMUNICATIONS/DISPATCH LIFE INSURANCE 214.38COMMUNICATIONS/DISPATCH LONG TERM DISABILITY 987.81OPERATIONSLIFE INSURANCE 997.30OPERATIONSLONG TERM DISABILITY 601.34BLDG & ENERGY G & A LIFE INSURANCE 632.83BLDG & ENERGY G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 50.54SUSTAINABILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 30.61SUSTAINABILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 131.58PUBLIC WORKS G & A LIFE INSURANCE 106.68PUBLIC WORKS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 487.68ENGINEERING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 487.96ENGINEERING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 427.86PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LIFE INSURANCE 455.51PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 102.36CABLE TV G & A LIFE INSURANCE 100.48CABLE TV G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 41.66HOUSING REHAB G & A LIFE INSURANCE 40.90HOUSING REHAB G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 250.20WATER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 245.32WATER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 140.98SEWER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 163.86SEWER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 88.40SOLID WASTE G&A LIFE INSURANCE 86.62SOLID WASTE G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 144.28STORM WATER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 115.56STORM WATER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 15,880.48EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A LIFE INSURANCE 259.08ORGANIZED REC G & A LIFE INSURANCE 264.30ORGANIZED REC G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 261.62PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 256.56PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 41.66NATURAL RESOURCES G & A LIFE INSURANCE 40.90NATURAL RESOURCES G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 143.52WESTWOOD G & A LIFE INSURANCE 140.68WESTWOOD G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 273.05REC CENTER SALARIES LIFE INSURANCE 267.82REC CENTER SALARIES LONG TERM DISABILITY 168.40VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LIFE INSURANCE 164.84VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 36 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 36Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 33,729.12 3,062.85THE WILEY LAW OFFICE HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,062.85 100.00THOEN ANNA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 100.00 127.00THOMES KELSEY SOCCER REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 8.00THOMPSON JAYE PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 304.74THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 304.74 45.00THORSON ELIZABETH DANCE REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 518.30THRIVEPASSEMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 518.30 3,372.00THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 3,372.00 105.00TILLMANN MONIE WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 105.00 977.50TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 148.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,125.50 33.25TIMPONE ALI HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 33.25 130.00TINKLENBERG ALISSA PARK BUILDINGS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 130.00 2,500.00TOLLBERG HOMES LLC ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC 2,500.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 37 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 37Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,363.98TRAFFIC AND PARKING CONTROL CO., INC. UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 2,363.98 200.00TREEHOUSERACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A MEETING EXPENSE 200.00 714.41TRI STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 708.48ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,422.89 127.00TSCHANN MARY PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 2,630.95TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 2,630.95 1,251.00TWIN CITY OUTDOOR SERVICES INC SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 441.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,692.00 34.98TYLER EMILY FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 34.98 720.00UHL CO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,034.76FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 28,122.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 1,758.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 219.50REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 32,854.26 50.00ULLSPERGER DAN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 30.00UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS AREA EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNITED WAY 30.00 5,735.00UNIVERSAL PAINTING & DRYWALL INC.REC CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 5,735.00 1,525.84US AUTOFORCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 38 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 38Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,525.84 332.51US DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT WAGE GARNISHMENTS 332.51 3,265.46USDA, APHIS, GENERAL DEER MANAGEMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,265.46 30,962.59VALLEY-RICH CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 30,962.59 10.00VAN BENSCHOTEN KELSEY PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 24.00VAN BENSCHOTEN SARAH PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 24.00 5,445.15VENT GUYS PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,445.15 20.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 20.00 50.04VERIZONSEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 26,358.12CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.OFFICE EQUIPMENT 71.12CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 26,479.28 1,368.00VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER COMPANY UNINSURED LOSS G&A UNINSURED LOSS 1,368.00 982.19VIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 982.19 2,848.00-VINCO, INC.GO BONDS - NATURE CTR BAL SH RETAINAGE PAYABLE 56,960.00GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 54,112.00 10.00VON VERONIKA PRESCHOOL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 39 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 39Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 115.00VONRUDEN ERIN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 115.00 195.00WALDMAN STEVE PARK BUILDINGS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 195.00 3,340.80WALKER DESIGHN STUDIO STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 14.40PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 122.40WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 122.40STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,600.00 127.00WALLER ISAIAH PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 127.00 272.10WARNING LITES OF MN INC SNOW PLOWING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 272.10 105,538.87WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN SOLID WASTE G&A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 40,088.35SOLID WASTE G&A RECYCLING SERVICE 23,965.50SOLID WASTE G&A YARD WASTE SERVICE 36,778.30SOLID WASTE G&A ORGANICS 206,371.02 4,776.55WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 4,776.55 130.00WEERTS DAVID BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 130.00 750.00WENDELFACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 750.00 70.55WESTWOOD HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC. NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 70.55 136.73WINSUPPLY OF EDEN PRAIRIE RELAMPING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 136.73 282.99WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING 282.99 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 40 4/27/2020CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 10:10:07R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 40Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 4/24/20203/28/2020 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 42.96WOLFF JEFF PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A MEETING EXPENSE 42.96 16.90WS & D PERMIT SERVICE BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 530.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 546.90 35.50WSB ASSOC INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 35.50 17,025.16XCEL ENERGY FACILITIES MCTE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 23,140.02PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 28,237.18WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,313.14REILLY G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 4,471.73SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,976.56STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 5,111.69PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 20,688.31REC CENTER BUILDING ELECTRIC SERVICE 101,963.79 496.77ZACKS INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 496.77 152,453.20ZAMBONI COMPANY USA, INC.CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 152,453.20 478.00ZARNOTH BRUSH WORKS INC SWEEPING EQUIPMENT PARTS 478.00 59.26ZIMMER JACLYN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 59.26 Report Totals 3,630,547.82 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 41 Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 4b Executive summary Title: Amendment to Ordinance 2581-20 vacating portions of alley right-of-way – 31st St. W. Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is categorized as a Required Action** •Motion to approve Second Reading of Ordinance vacating the right-of-way between 31st Street West and the Highway 7 Frontage Road between Glenhurst Avenue South and Inglewood Avenue South and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication. Policy consideration: Is the right-of-way needed for public purposes? Summary: The city council approved Ordinance 2581-20 vacating portions of right-of-way west of Glenhurst Avenue South and between 31st Street West and County State Aid Highway 25 Service Drive on February 3, 2020. The applicant requests council amend the right-of-way vacation Ordinance 2581-20 to vacate additional right-of-way located immediately to the west of the right-of-way vacated in February 2020. The applicant’s title company identified additional right-of-way that needs to be vacated. This right-of-way is in what was formerly known as Halifax Avenue, the remainder of which was previously vacated in 1910. City staff supports vacating the additional right-of-way, as there is no longer any public access to this portion of land, and the city does not intend to build an alley in this right-of-way. City council voted 7 to 0 to approve the First Reading of the Ordinance on April 20, 2020. Financial or budget considerations: None. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Ordinance Ordinance summary for publication Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, senior planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning and zoning supervisor Karen Barton, community development director Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 Title: Amendment to Ordinance 2581-20 vacating portions of alley right-of-way – 31st St. W. Ordinance No. ____- 20 An ordinance vacating public right-of-way and amending Ordinance 2581-20, entitled an ordinance vacating portions of alley right-of-way, adopted February 3, 2020 31st Street West between Glenhurst Avenue and Inglewood Avenue The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. Sela Group, LLC and Parkway 25, LLC submitted a petition to vacate public right- of-way. The petition requests amendments to City Council Ordinance No. 2581-20 to vacate more right-of-way than was included in a previous petition and requests the City Council formally acknowledge that conditions of approval included in said ordinance are satisfied. Section 2. Sela Group, LLC and Parkway 25, LLC own all properties abutting both sides of the right-of-way proposed to be vacated. The notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on April 9, 2020, and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the right-of-way is not needed for public purposes, and that it is for the best interest of the public that said right-of-way be vacated. Section 3. The Metropolitan Council authorized the City of St. Louis Park to put into effect the comprehensive plan amendment approved by City Council Resolution No. 20-013 on March 10, 2020, which satisfied the requirements referenced in Sections 2 and 5 of Ordinance 2581- 20. Section 4. Ordinance 2581-20, is hereby amended to replace Section 3 to read as follows: Section 3. The following described public right-of-way as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park and depicted in the attached Exhibit A, is vacated: All that part of the 6 foot wide alley lying northerly of and adjoining the southerly line of CALHOUN LAKE SIDE PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, easterly of the southerly extension of the westerly line of Lot 16, Block 3, said CALHOUN LAKE SIDE PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., westerly of the southerly extension of the easterly line of Lot 15, said Block 3, and southerly of the southerly line of Block 3 extended across the north – south alley in Block 3, said CALHOUN LAKE SIDE PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. All that part of the 6 foot wide alley and that part of Halifax Avenue dedicated by MANHATTAN PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying southerly of and adjoining the northerly line of said MANHATTAN PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4b) Page 3 Title: Amendment to Ordinance 2581-20 vacating portions of alley right-of-way – 31st St. W. MINN., easterly of the northerly extension of the easterly line of Lot 1, Block 4, said MANHATTAN PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., westerly of the northerly extension of the easterly line of Lot 1, Block 3, said MANHATTAN PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., and northerly of the north line of Block 3 and its westerly extension, said MANHATTAN PARK, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN. Section 5. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this ordinance in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Section 6. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2020 Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading April 20, 2020 Second reading May 4, 2020 Date of publication May 14, 2020 Date ordinance takes effect May 29, 2020 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4b) Page 4 Title: Amendment to Ordinance 2581-20 vacating portions of alley right-of-way – 31st St. W. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4b) Page 5 Title: Amendment to Ordinance 2581-20 vacating portions of alley right-of-way – 31st St. W. SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION Ordinance No. ____-20 An ordinance vacating alley right-of-way This ordinance states that right-of-way south of the Hwy 7 Service Road and north of 31st Street West, between Inglewood Avenue and Glenhurst Avenue will be vacated. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2020 Jake Spano /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: May 14, 2020 Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 4c Executive summary Title: 2019 fund equity transfers and 2020 budget amendments Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is categorized as a Required Action** •Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing 2019 fund equity transfers. •Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing 2020 budget amendments. Policy consideration: •Is the city council in agreement with the proposed general fund equity transfers to the uninsured loss fund and employee administration fund? •Does the city council authorize the 2020 budget amendments to the water and solid waste utility funds? Summary: This report includes information on the projected unassigned fund balance in the general fund and proposed transfers to the uninsured loss and employee administration fund for the year ending December 31, 2019. The need for transfers between funds is analyzed each year and information is forwarded to council for approval prior to completion of the audit. Two 2020 budget amendments are being presented for the water and solid waste utility funds. These are necessary administrative revisions to the amounts in the original resolution to combine the Reilly budget with the water utility fund and to include curbside pickup in the solid waste fund budget. Financial or budget considerations: The proposed transfers will direct resources to funds where needed to help in attaining long-term financial sustainability. The budget amendments are administrative items from the adoption of the 2020 budget in December 2019 necessary for accurate financial reporting. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Discussion Resolutions 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 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4c) Page 2 Title: 2019 fund equity transfers and 2020 budget amendments Discussion Background: At the end of each calendar year, funds are analyzed along with the long range financial management plan and capital improvement plan to determine if transfers should be recommended to meet fund balance policy requirements, to assist with long-term sustainability of other funds and to provide funding for specific projects. Amendments to the originally adopted budget are also recommended as necessary during the year. These amendments are administrative revisions and not programmatic changes. Present considerations: 2019 Equity Transfers As per the December 31, 2018 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), the unassigned fund balance in the general fund was $17,697,405, which was equal to approximately 45% of the 2019 budgeted expenditures. Unassigned fund balance is the residual amount available for any purpose and not restricted, committed or otherwise assigned. The city’s fund balance policy states that the city will strive to maintain an unassigned fund balance in the general fund that is within a range of 40% to 50% of the following year’s budgeted expenditures with a target of 45%, and that any excess amount can be transferred to other funds. The city’s policy follows the Office of the State Auditor’s recommended fund balance guidelines and aligns with that of AAA rated cities. As staff has explained in prior discussions with council, we are retaining and assigning an additional amount in 2019 beyond the 45% for potential COVID-19 impacts. After this fund balance assignment, there is approximately $300,000 available to transfer to other funds. Transferring excess fund balance from the general fund to other funds ensures that funds align with the city’s fund balance policy and long-range financial management plan. The city has routinely made equity transfers from the general fund in the past. Staff is recommending two transfers to other funds for the year ending December 31, 2019 which will maintain the approximate 45% target of the 2020 budgeted expenditures. Employee Administration Fund – Transfer in of $150,000: The Employee Administration Fund covers personnel related costs such as workers compensation, tuition reimbursement, unemployment, retirement flex leave payouts and other employee initiatives. This fund began receiving a small property tax allocation in 2012, as it did not previously have a dedicated funding source and relied on periodic transfers from the general fund. Due to retirements that have occurred and are anticipated and a potential COVID related increase in unemployment expense, a transfer of $150,000 is recommended to this fund from the general fund in 2019. Uninsured Loss Fund – Transfer in of $150,000: The Uninsured Loss Fund covers the city’s costs of liability and property damage claims not covered by insurance and the costs until the annual deductible and aggregate limits have been met. The only revenue sources for this fund are claim recoveries from third parties and the annual property/casualty dividend returned by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. A transfer of $150,000 is proposed to this fund from the general fund in 2019. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4c) Page 3 Title: 2019 fund equity transfers and 2020 budget amendments 2020 Budget Amendments Staff is requesting approval of two amendments to the 2020 budget adopted on December 16, 2019. These are both necessary administrative revisions to the original budgetary amounts and not programmatic changes. The water fund expense budget will be increased by $686,593 from $6,877,695 to $7,564,288 to consolidate the Reilly budget with the water utility fund for reporting purposes to be consistent with prior years. The solid waste fund expense budget will be increased by $72,000 from $3,907,820 to $3,979,820 to include the cost of curbside pickup. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4c) Page 4 Title: 2019 fund equity transfers and 2020 budget amendments Resolution No. 20-____ Resolution authorizing fund equity transfers Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park has created various special purpose funds; and Whereas, some of those funds rely on transfers from other funds for their continued operation; and Whereas, specific expenditures require resources from other funds; Now therefore be it resolved, by the St. Louis Park City Council: Approval is hereby given to the Chief Financial Officer to transfer the following sums of money as of the year ending December 31, 2019 from the General Fund to the Employee Administration Fund and Uninsured Loss Fund as shown. Transferring Fund Receiving Fund Amount General Fund Employee Administration Fund $ 150,000 General Fund Uninsured Loss Fund $ 150,000 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2020 Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4c) Page 5 Title: 2019 fund equity transfers and 2020 budget amendments Resolution No. 20-____ Resolution authorizing 2020 budget amendments Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by State Statutes to approve a budget in December each year for the coming year; and Whereas, subsequent amendments to the original budget as adopted may be required; Now therefore be it resolved, by the St. Louis Park City Council, that the 2020 Water Utility and Solid Waste Utility Fund budgets are amended as shown: Fund Original Expense Budget Amended Expense Budget Change Water Utility Fund $6,877,695 $ 7,564,288 $686,593 Solid Waste Utility Fund $3,907,820 $ 3,979,820 $72,000 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2020 Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 4d OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA February 19, 2020 – 6:00 p.m. COMMUNITY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Beneke, Matt Eckholm, Courtney Erwin, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Jessica Kraft, Carl Robertson MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynette Dumalag STAFF PRESENT: Gary Morrison, Sean Walther 1.Call to Order – Roll Call 2.Approval of Minutes of Feb 5, 2020 Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Eckholm seconded the motion and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. 3.Public Hearings A.Cedarwood Dachis Addition preliminary and final plat Applicant: Toni Dachis Case Nos: 19-39-Sm 19-40-VAR Gary Morrison, assistant zoning administrator, presented the staff report. The applicant requested a subdivision and variance at 4000 25th Street West, in the Fern Hill neighborhood. He noted the lot sizes for Lots 1, 2, and 3. Access to lot 1 will be unchanged off 25th Street West, lot 2 will access France Avenue, and lot 3 access could be off France Avenue South or 25th Street West. Mr. Morrison stated there are no proposals for tree removal, but this will be determined when building permits are submitted for lots 2 and 3. He noted sidewalks will be included along 25th Street West. The house and pool house are in the back yard, according to current code. With the subdivision, however, the lot lines are reoriented, so the front and rear yards will change, and the variance request becomes evident because the pool house will be in the side yard, after the changes. Mr. Morrison stated the property use is single family residential, consistent with low density residential designation. He stated if the variance is not approved, the pool house would need to be relocated or removed. Two people spoke in favor of the applications at the neighborhood meeting and a letter of support was received from a third resident. Page 2 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4d) Title: Planning commission meeting minutes February 19, 2020 Mr. Morrison stated that staff requests approval of the preliminary and final plat, subject to the conditions recommended by staff. Further, staff recommended approval of the variance to allow an accessory structure in the side yard, subject to the conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Robertson asked about the sidewalk at the subdivision and if it would connect with any other sidewalks. Mr. Morrison stated it would connect to the sidewalk on the west side of France Avenue South and a sidewalk on the east side of Huntington Avenue South. Commission Johnson-Madison asked if the sidewalk will dead-end on 25th street. Mr. Morrison stated it will not continue and connect to any sidewalks west of the site along 25th Street West, adding the city engineering department recently lead a public process regarding potentially adding more sidewalks in this neighborhood and city council decided not to pursue that option. Chair Kraft opened the public hearing. Lynne Carper, 4010 Highwood Road, stated initially the sign posted about the work was not clear. He initially thought it was referring to the road and sidewalk improvements planned for this summer. It wasn’t until he spoke with Councilmember Rog that he learned there was a subdivision proposed here. Mr. Carper stated he has been aware of subdivisions in his area, and stated the preference was for not doing subdivisions in these neighborhoods. However, he added, he does understand property owners do have the right to do what they prefer on their properties, so he will support this. Additionally, he asked if the zoning will change now or in the future from single-family housing. Mr. Morrison stated the property is guided in the comprehensive plan as low-density residential and zoned R-2 residential. Staff does not anticipate any changes. Mr. Carper wondered if the lots would meet the minimum lot size, and indeed it does, according to Mr. Morrison’s presentation. He asked at what point does the sidewalk get constructed, and does the owner put the sidewalks in. Mr. Morrison stated the sidewalk installation will be at the applicant’s expense and will be coordinated with street improvements in the area. Mr. Carper asked about driveways and if there will be a driveway on the northern most side of the property. There is no intention to have a second driveway on France Avenue, it will come off 25th Street. Mr. Morrison stated there will be a final decision made by the engineering department when right-of-way permits are requested and when the house plans are submitted for building permits. Page 3 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4d) Title: Planning commission meeting minutes February 19, 2020 Mr. Carper asked if a house is inserted will the new address be on France Avenue. Mr. Morrison stated staff will look at this and can make a change administratively with the owner’s consent. Michael Meyer, 2512 Huntington Avenue South, stated the property is well maintained and very open. He is concerned that once the property is changed, it’s gone. He is also concerned about hardscape and the addition of sidewalks, patios, foundations, as well. He stated about 20 trees might have to be removed and he has concerns about this as well, and is concerned the replacements might not be made in the same area. He asked if the home will fit into the neighborhood, adding he is concerned about this, and about the impact on his home as it relates to the view. Right now, there is no parking on France Avenue at this area, and he is concerned about where folks will park when visiting and overflow parking. Mr. Meyer added there is a city bus turnout, asked if that will stay or go, and if the bus company be brought into this discussion. He is also concerned about proximity the to the holding ponds and Cedar Lake area. Mr. Meyer stated if approved will this be two separate lots. He asked if other builders come in, will they build in order to benefit the other properties in the area. This summer the roads in this area will be reconstructed. He is concerned about the mess that will occur with both projects going on simultaneously. He is also concerned about a two-story home and how it will affect their view. Also, if the driveways are on France Avenue, he has concerns about traffic there, and on 25th Street, especially with safety for bikers and pedestrians. Toni Dachis, 4000 West 25th Street, is the applicant. She stated the concerns are legitimate; she has thought about them and will do what she can to accommodate what was mentioned, if she has control. She stated she needs to be able to move and downsize and she hopes a new owner will keep the existing house as is. The Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated she is very familiar with this beautiful area. She stated she has learned nothing stays the same, times change and she feels the value of the neighborhood will determine the value of the homes built on lot 2 and 3. The houses built on the lots will likely fit in with the neighborhood and she will vote to approve this. Commission Elkholm agreed and added the applicant has gone out of their way to make this right by the neighborhood. He hates to see the loss of mature trees and the best that can be done is to require that they are replaced. He will support this. Commissioner Beneke asked if there is any consideration to bike trails on France Avenue. Sean Walther, planning and zoning supervisor, stated there is already a bike lane on France Avenue and a sidewalk on the west side of the road as well, and there are no other plans at this time. Page 4 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4d) Title: Planning commission meeting minutes February 19, 2020 Commissioner Robertson stated this is a good plan and the concerns are valid, however, folks have the right to do what they want with their own property. He asked about the location of the bus turnout, and if the south lot wants to have access off France Avenue, will the turnout be moveable. He stated he will support this project. Mr. Morrison stated the first priority would be to not change a turnout. If it does need to be changed, there is a process with Metro Transit and a cost associated with it. Chair Kraft likes the plan as well and is excited about the single-family home development. She stated the loss of trees is sad, but she is glad for the replacement program. Commissioner Robertson made a motion, Commissioner Elkholm seconded, recommending approval of the addition of the preliminary and final plat, and the variance on the side yard, subject to the recommendations by staff. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0. B.High school artificial turf field conditional use permit, application 19-33-CUP was withdrawn by the applicant, Thomas Bravo 4.Other Business - none 5.Communications Mr. Walther stated Feb. 24, 2020, is the Boards and Commissions annual meeting at Treehouse, 5757 Wayzata Boulevard, from 6-8 p.m. There will be a light dinner and a dance performance from Wat Prom Buddhist Temple. This is meant to be a celebration of accomplishments from 2019. Commissioner Elkholm will present on behalf of the planning commission the commission’s accomplishments last year and some of the issues on the work plan for 2020. Mr. Walther added a joint meeting with the city council to discuss the 2020 work plan will be held on May 26. The next planning commission meeting on March 4 will be a study session only in the Westwood Conference Room from 6-7 p.m. and the Historic Walker Lake draft ordinance will be discussed. Following the study session, a joint meeting with several boards and commissions from 7-8 p.m. in the council chambers to hear a presentation from Alicia Sojourner, racial equity manager, about racial equity and inclusion in St. Louis Park. 6.Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:38 p.m. Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 4e OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA March 4, 2020 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Jim Beneke, Lynette Dumalag, Matt Eckholm, Courtney Erwin, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Jessica Kraft, Carl Robertson MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jennifer Monson, planner; Laura Chamberlain, planning consultant with HKGi STUDY SESSION The study session commenced at 6:00 p.m. 1.Establishing a New Base Zoning District for Historic Walker Lake Laura Chamberlain, HKGi consultant, provided background on the plan and how implementation will lead to work on establishing a zoning district for Historic Walker Lake. Ms. Chamberlain noted the plan was approved by city council in January 2020. The plan considers three topic areas: establishment of an overlay zoning district to preserve character, wayfinding and placemaking, and a merchant’s association and affordability. Ms. Chamberlain stated recommended changes to uses in the area include light industrial, food vendors, and breweries. She added the overlay recommendations also refer to signage, street furniture, unique features, parking requirements, and designating shared parking opportunities. Ms. Chamberlain stated the ordinance will allow for a combination of smaller scaled industrial and commercial uses in this area but will not allow stand-alone apartment buildings. She noted the city recently updated the mixed-use zoning district and staff and consultants are recommending a similar approach be used here, as well. She added establishing parking standards was a top priority and the city already adopted a new parking ordinance for the district. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated that there is no comparable historic district within the city today but suggested the district be able to be applied to other areas of the city if needed in the future. Ms. Chamberlain stated the district is mixed-use in nature with commercial and retail uses. She stated the city has residential, commercial and mixed-use divisions within the zoning ordinance, and Historic Walker Lake could be a new mixed-use district that lives within the mixed-use division currently in existence within the code. Page 2 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4e) Title: Planning commission meeting minutes March 4, 2020 Ms. Chamberlain stated that staff is looking at the revitalization plan to see what elements are necessary to establish zoning standards and which should be design guidelines. Commissioner Kraft asked if the code will refer to the guidelines. Ms. Chamberlain stated yes. Commissioner Beneke asked if there would still be a primary entrance area. Ms. Monson stated yes, this could still be included in the guidelines. Ms. Chamberlain stated that the revitalization plan gives recommendations on building materials, colors, and design that can be used a guidance. She added that these items refer more to the scale of the building rather than the actual design, and that the city already has some standards on building design. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated the scale of the new apartment building in Linden Hills took into consideration the scale of the surrounding buildings and looks fine in the area. Commissioner Robertson noted a bill that is currently being reviewed at the state legislature where cities would only be allowed to have buildings that meet the basic building codes only. Ms. Monson stated staff is aware of this and lobbyists are working on this issue. Commissioner Robertson stated this type of bill is filled with unintended consequences for city building and zoning codes. Commissioner Dumalag asked if any of the buildings are historic. Ms. Monson stated no but through a public process the area was branded Historic Walker Lake. Ms. Chamberlain noted that the guidelines will include landscaping recommendations. Ms. Monson stated the purpose of the guidelines for the landscaping will be to enhance the unique and eclectic features of the area and buildings. She explained that one landscape design for the entire area would be more difficult to establish since the property owners are not interested in a special service district at this time. Ms. Chamberlain asked the commission if they support this approach for the district through a new zoning district and separate design guidelines. Also, she asked if there are items that should be added. Commissioner Robertson stated the standards and guidelines all seem appropriate. He stated he would like to see flexibility within the code so it can apply for future districts if the city is if going toward a form-based type zoning district. Ms. Monson stated that we can make the code flexible and that we should discuss TOD district requirements further and at a different time. Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated each historical district must be established and a vision created. Page 3 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4e) Title: Planning commission meeting minutes March 4, 2020 Commissioner Robertson asked how many other historic districts the city will have. He added if there will be others within the city, will this type of planning be done in those areas, and should the historic district be more of a generic description of the concept. Ms. Monson stated she agrees there is potential for other similar areas within the city where the standards might be similar but then there might be a difference design guideline for each area. Commissioner Johnston-Madison and Commissioner Robertson agreed. Commissioner Beneke asked if there is any plan to do anything along Highway 7 in the open area in front of the Central Community Center building. Ms. Monson stated that the area is city-owned right of way with a small portion owned by the school district. She stated that the city and school district have talked about using that space for additional parking if necessary, but that the revitalization plan identifies that area for a shared active space that can be flexible as needed. Ms. Chamberlain stated there are additional topics to come back and discuss further with the commission, including the ordinance and design guidelines. Commissioner Robertson asked a question about landscaping and whether the city allows perennial gardens and pollinator landscaping. Ms. Monson stated the city does encourage native plantings. The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 4f Executive summary Title: Resolution approving relocation of polling place for 2020 Primary and General Elections Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive and Required Action** •Motion to adopt Resolution approving relocation of polling place for Ward 3, Precinct 9, from Knollwood Place Apartments to St. Louis Park Municipal Svc. Center, 7305 Oxford St. Policy consideration: Does the proposal meet the statutory requirements for designation of a polling place? Summary: After Prince of Peace Lutheran Church closed in 2019 the polling location for Ward 3, Precinct 9 was shifted to Knollwood Place Apartments. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a change in leadership at that facility, the location is no longer available. MN Statute 204B.16 requires polling places to be designated by December 31 of each year and also provides municipalities the authority to make changes after the deadline in situations where a polling place becomes unavailable for use. Staff evaluates locations for polling places based on a number of criteria including accessibility, parking, traffic implications, size of space, availability, the ability of the facility to accommodate election activities, security, and voter convenience. Additionally, MN Statute Section 204B.16 requires that the polling place be located within the precinct or within one mile of the precinct boundary. Currently there are no viable options within the precinct that meet the criteria outlined above. Additionally, given that this will be the second change to the Precinct 9 polling place in as many years, staff recommends the use of a more permanent, internally controlled facility. The Municipal Service Center, located at 7305 Oxford Street, is located within one mile of a Precinct 9 boundary and is able to meet the other criteria for a polling place. The staff at the Municipal Service Center are extremely supportive of this change and are committed to helping us provide an outstanding experience to voters on Election Day. Elections staff will ensure voters in Precinct 9 are notified of the change in polling location. All registered voters in Precinct 9 will be notified of the change via mailed notice from Hennepin County at least 25 days before the election. Information regarding the new polling location will be published in the Park Perspective, Sun Sailor newspaper, and on the city website. All maps and precinct finders will be updated to reflect the change. Regular notifications of the change will also go out via all social media outlets, Next Door, and Gov Delivery. As of now, all other polling places previously designated will remain unchanged for 2020 and are scheduled to be reviewed as a part of the redistricting process in 2021. Elections staff have communicated with representatives from all 16 polling places to discuss the changing needs related to COVID-19 and our commitment to prioritizing the health and safety of voters, election workers, and all users of the facilities on Election Day. Regular communications will continue over the coming months as we adapt to the changing situation. Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Discussion, Resolution Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager Page 2 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4f) Title: Resolution approving relocation of polling place for 2020 Primary and General Elections Discussion Considerations and analysis When a polling location changes voters must find that new location, plan a route to go vote, and know about the change. This requires checking information online, in print or by mail. High information voters tend to be aware changes and check information. By contrast medium and low information voters only check in on voting once every 2-4 years. They may not be aware of any change and moving a location can cause confusion and additional challenges for many voters. Moving a location for a second time is therefore that much more difficult, and a third move must be prevented. Accessibility The new location must serve voters with disabilities or mobility challenges. Distance to a parking lot, access to an elevator if needed and accommodations for restrooms all must be considered any time a polling place is selected. Precinct 9 contains a senior living facility that makes up roughly 20% of their total voters. The new location should consider required accessibility standards with special attention to serve this population. City owned Recent changes in polling locations and an exhaustive search resulted in private facilities being removed from consideration. Disruptions to the voting process should be minimized and risk of another change is unacceptable. A location owned and operated by the City of St. Louis Park provides the best risk mitigation strategy. Operations and Recreation Director Cindy Walsh approved use of the MSC and recommended against use of other city owned park facilities in the area. Transportation Accessing a polling location by bus, bike or car should be a short trip from any residence within the precinct to the polling location. Ideally residents should be able to access the location as a pedestrian either by walking or using a wheelchair exclusively although in many cases that is not always feasible given the size of our precincts. Unfortunately, the MSC is located outside the precinct, is not accessible easily by bus and is separated from the district by a major rail line. Given this reality, education and outreach about the change should include directions to access the new polling location. We consulted Engineering Director Deb Heiser and she provided information about traffic disruption and possible routes for voters traveling to the polling place via bike, bus, or car. Elections staff will work with the senior living facilities to discuss possible shuttle service for voters to the precinct through Metro Mobility or other means, although given the impact of COVID-19 the recommendation for vulnerable populations will be to strongly consider voting by mail. Poll Workers Locations should be climate controlled and have easy access to restroom and lunchroom facilities for poll workers. Frequently they are working 14 or more hours to serve voters. Properly maintained facilities that regularly host large groups of employees help to facilitate these temporary needs. The MSC has a lunchroom and space for employees which the poll workers could share. Page 3 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4f) Title: Resolution approving relocation of polling place for 2020 Primary and General Elections Parking A facility can expect 100 or more voters during peak times for voting in any precinct in St. Louis Park. Voting typically takes 15 minutes and most voters use a car to transport themselves without anyone else to the polls. This means that large parking lots can help to deal with fluctuations in parking volume. For the MSC this could mean workers would be displaced during election days and would have to consider alternate accommodations. Recommendation: Use the Municipal Service Center as a permanent polling location for Precinct 9 and consider the recent, multiple location changes in redistricting discussions in 2021. Mitigate the transportation concerns through targeted, direct voter outreach and education efforts. Page 4 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4f) Title: Resolution approving relocation of polling place for 2020 Primary and General Elections Resolution No. 20-___ Resolution approving relocation of polling place for Precinct 9 located in Ward 3 from Knollwood Place Apartments to the St. Louis Park Municipal Service Center, 7305 Oxford St. Whereas, on April 2, 2012 the St. Louis Park City Council adopted Resolution No. 12-060, establishing precinct boundaries and polling places following the 2010 U.S. Census, Legislative Redistricting; and Whereas, the city was informed that Knollwood Place Apartments located at 3630 Phillips Parkway would not be available for use as a polling place for the 2020 election cycle; and Whereas, MN Statute Section 204B.16 states voting locations must be located within the boundaries of a precinct or within one mile of a boundary, accessible to and usable by elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities, and of sufficient size to accommodate all election activities; and Whereas, the alternate polling location has been evaluated and recommended based on the criteria established and statutory requirements. Now therefore be it resolved that the St. Louis Park City Council hereby designates the following relocated polling place for Ward 3, Precinct 9 for the 2020 Primary and General Elections and all future elections: Precinct 9 – St. Louis Park Municipal Service Center, 7305 Oxford Street Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2020 Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 4g Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is categorized as a Required Action** • Motion to adopt Resolution rescinding item 9 of Resolution 3681, authorizing the installation of parking restrictions on both sides of the road within 50 feet of the intersection of 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue, and authorizing timed parking restrictions on the west side of Kipling Avenue north of Excelsior Boulevard. Policy consideration: The installation of parking restrictions is allowed per the city’s established regulatory authority. Summary: In March 2020, staff received a request to evaluate safety concerns near the intersection of 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue. The concerns revolve around the ability to see oncoming vehicles when turning onto 36th 1/2 Street from Kipling Avenue. Later in March 2020, the traffic committee reviewed the request to evaluate this intersection. The committee recommended to restrict parking within 50 feet of the intersection on both sides of the street. The restrictions are recommended to increase sight distances and prevent parked vehicles from impeding the intersection. In April 2020, a letter was sent to the area to all property owners, residents, and tenants outlining the concerns and recommended parking restrictions and asked for feedback. The letter was sent to over 400 addresses. Staff received 10 comments. Four were in favor of the restrictions, three were in favor of the restrictions in general but wanted some sort of change, and three were against the restrictions. The west side of Kipling Avenue north of Excelsior Boulevard has timed parking restrictions. These are governed by Resolution 3681. The proposed resolution rescinds the specific item governing these restrictions and rewrites them to account for the proposed all-day parking restrictions. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of enacting these controls is minimal and will come out of the general operating budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Resolution 3681 and new resolution Location map Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 2 Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue Discussion Background: In March 2020, staff received a request to evaluate safety concerns near the intersection of 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue. The concerns revolve around the ability to see oncoming vehicles when turning onto 36th 1/2 Street from Kipling Avenue. Parking is currently allowed on both sides of the street near this intersection. There are existing parking restrictions on the south leg more than 50 feet south of the intersection. At that point, the west side has 2-hour parking restrictions and the east side has all-day parking restrictions. Later in March 2020, the traffic committee reviewed the request to evaluate this intersection. The committee recommended to restrict parking within 50 feet of the intersection on both sides of the street. The restrictions are recommended to increase sight distances and prevent parked vehicles from impeding the intersection. In April 2020, a letter was sent to the area to all property owners, residents, and tenants outlining the concerns and recommended parking restrictions and asked for feedback. The letter was sent to over 400 addresses. Staff received 10 comments. Four were in favor of the restrictions, three were in favor of the restrictions in general but wanted some sort of change, and three were against the restrictions. Their comments are summarized below: Comments in favor of parking restrictions: • I wanted to comment and say I think this is a great recommendation. As a resident who frequently crosses through these intersections, I can say I rarely feel safe crossing because of the lack of visibility. While some may find inconvenience with reduced areas to park, after living in the neighborhood, I believe there is ample parking space farther from the intersection and fully support his initiative. – Paige Olson • I am VERY much in favor of the proposed parking restriction for the Kipling Ave. and 36 1/2 St intersection. It is dangerous without any cars parked near. When cars are parked near, you need to inch very far into the intersection to get a clear view. Again, I am very much in favor of the parking restriction proposal. – Jill Cook • I live in the Park Villa apartments just a House off that intersection since November 2018. I think you should add the signs to make it safer to cross the street as a car or pedestrian. I’ve read about sustainable cities and street design, and I know having cars parked on the side of streets can help lower speeds and give drivers a warning sign that there’s less space visually and more potential for a crash. However, I completely understand that any cars on Kipling cannot see the cars coming, especially cars coming around the easy right turn lane of Excelsior onto W 36 1/2. If W 36 1/2 St is repaired or redesigned more in the future, here’s a couple of ideas to help improve it in my opinion: - I would love to see a bump out that would make the turn from Excelsior to W 36 1/2 more harsh, lowering the speed of cars onto the street. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 3 Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue - Another idea is one completed sidewalk on Kipling with an elevated speed bump/crossing lines perhaps for the intersection? I’ve seen those in Minneapolis a lot, but if they harm ADA standards perhaps bump outs and the parking restrictions would be best, as well as a speed limit reduction -Jonathan Smith • Nancy Duncan of 3600 Lynn Avenue called to say she was very happy with the proposed parking restrictions. She wished more of the street was restricted to parking. She also asked for the restrictions to be applied to Lynn Avenue. Comments in favor of restrictions but wanted changes: • I have been a renter in this neighborhood for a total of 4 years. There are a lot of renters/owners in this area that are forced to park on the street due to a lack of driveway and garage space. It is manageable though because there is a lot of available street parking and residents aren't forced to park far way from their homes. I agree with the fact that increased sight distances are critical to the safety of the neighborhood and those driving through the neighborhood, but 50 feet seems excessive. In an area that is already tight on parking this change would take away roughly 24 parking spaces for average size (16-17 feet) vehicles. I feel that 30 feet would be more reasonable as this would save 8 parking spots. – Jenna Luisier • As a 5-year resident of the neighborhood, I tend to agree with the proposal. I go through the intersection every day on my way to work, and it's definitely a dicey operation, as no one can see the other coming. Even though I always have the right of way, I always slow down and prepare for a spur of the moment stop, as I've had a few close calls. However, might I suggest holding off on the implementation for a bit? Space is pretty tight there right now, as all the builders for the new bank on Excelsior and Monterey park in that area while working. I'm fortunate enough to have off-street parking, but I strongly suspect that the folks who are less fortunate in that regard won't thank you for it if you remove eight of those precious spots right now. – Jesse Halvorsen, 4320 36th 1/2 St, Apt 305 • We have noticed that due to the construction of Bridgewater Bank on Excelsior Blvd, our street has been consistently crowded with cars. While we agree there should be some parking restrictions in place due to the concerns about sight distances and vehicles impending the intersection, we are concerned that the proposed all day parking restrictions will make it difficult for the residents of this block to find parking spots at the end of the work day. Our duplex is occupied with 3 residents, as are a lot of the other duplexes on the street. A lot of us rely on street parking on this block. We believe it would be extremely helpful to have parking restrictions during the day, but that these restrictions end at 4pm. This would allow for the street to stay relatively open during the day to assist in sight visibility near the stop signs, but it would also ensure that the residents of this block are able to park near their residences. – Laurel Szalkowski City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 4 Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue Comments against the proposed restrictions: • We live at 3622 Kipling Ave, so we are well familiar to the specific area in question. I am not in favor of the cited parking restrictions. Although sight lines are blocked currently, this is not an issue normally. Once all the huge trucks that are parked there on a daily basis leave when the construction of the Bridgewater Bank Building is complete this problem will for the most part go away. There is more traffic sometimes due to Opitz, but it’s not difficult to see around those vehicles and they don’t normally park on 36 ½ anyways- they park on Kipling. Also, if you restrict the said areas, cars will just move up into our actual neighborhood, making it more difficult for the people who live here to find a spot to park on a daily basis. I would say the main issue is speed. As you are probably aware, people use 36 ½ Street as a short cut and they go so fast on this road – it’s crazy. So, if anything, a speed bump or a stop sign at that corner would be the best move in my opinion. – Karen Javurek • Your letter dated April 3, 2020 did not state why the proposed change was being considered. I can only assume that it is for safety concerns. A simple solution would be to install a 4-way stop sign at the intersection. Part of the issue may be caused by the construction workers for the new building going up at Excelsior & Monterey. They need spaces to park and many times their vehicles are oversized. At 4:30 on 4-20-2020 there were no cars parked in those areas near the intersection, which may indicate that they were from the construction site. There is already a shortage of parking in that area, and your proposal will eliminate approximately 16-24 parking spaces. Our tenants, at 3614-16 Kipling, already experience enough competition for off-street parking. – Jeff Meehan, 18900 37th Ave N, Plymouth • this email is to inform you that your proposed restrictions on or near Kipling will eliminate parking for my tenants @ 3614-16 Kipling Ave who depend on street parking for their vehicles. In an already complex living /work situation for tenants, I am wondering what other provisions you intend on putting in place for my tenants to park their vehicles? Is there additional information in this proposal that is missing? Otherwise, you have eliminated parking in front of a residential property which has always been entitled to on- street parking. In addition, and if no other explanation is forthcoming, I will need to attend your scheduled May 4th meeting. Although the "Shelter in Place" order may be lifted at that time, I must secure parking for my tenants and will have no other choice but to attend your scheduled meeting and defend the rights of my tenants. I wonder if there is not a simpler solution, such as a 4-WAY stop, or somehow focus the onus of your parking issue on Opitz Outlet which is most likely the source of this congestion. – Joanie Meehan, 18900 37th Ave N, Plymouth • I was assuming that you understood, parking is already tight in the area and eliminating ANY parking for ANY tenants in the NEIGHBORHOOD could result in competition for on street parking. It is already a pretty hostile environment on the streets and in the workplace. I am surprised by the City of St. Louis Park to try to make such bold move during these uncertain times. Especially without the opportunity for residents or tax paying owners to voice their opinion in a more open forum. -Joanie Meehan, 18900 37th Ave N, Plymouth City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 5 Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue Resolution: There are existing timed parking restrictions on the west side of Kipling Avenue south of its intersection with 36th 1/2 Street. The restrictions, “No Parking 8 a.m. – 6 p.m.”, are governed by Resolution 3681. The resolution, adopted in 1969, created parking restrictions at many locations across the city. Item 9 of the resolution focuses on the west side of Kipling Avenue at the location in question. The proposed resolution rescinds this item and rewrites it to account for the new “all-day” parking restrictions. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 6 Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 7 Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 8 Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue Resolution No. 20-____ Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park received a request to evaluate safety concerns at the intersection of 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue; and, Whereas, the traffic committee has reviewed the request and recommended the installation of parking restrictions on both sides of the streets within 50 feet of the intersection of 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue; and, Whereas, Resolution 3681 governed timed parking restrictions on Kipling Avenue as well as many other locations; and, Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that Item 9 of Resolution 3681 is rescinded. It is further resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the engineering director is hereby authorized to: 1. Install all-day parking restrictions on both sides of 36th 1/2 Street from 50 feet west of the west right of way line of Kipling Avenue to 50 feet east of the east right of way line of Kipling Avenue. 2. Install all-day parking restrictions on both sides of Kipling Avenue from 50 feet south of the south right of way line of 36th 1/2 Street to 50 feet north of the north right of way line of 36th 1/2 Street. 3. Install “Two Hour Parking 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.” parking restrictions on the west side of Kipling Avenue from the north right of way line of Excelsior Boulevard to 50 feet south of the south right of way line of 36th 1/2 Street Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2020 Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4g) Page 9 Title: Traffic Study 725 - Authorize parking restrictions on 36th 1/2 Street and Kipling Avenue Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Consent agenda item: 4h Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 726 – Authorize parking restrictions on Hampshire Avenue near Lenox Community Center Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the installation of parking restrictions on the east side of Hampshire Avenue near the NW driveway of 6715 Minnetonka Boulevard. Policy consideration: The installation of parking restrictions is allowed per the city’s established regulatory authority. Summary: In January 2020, staff received a request to evaluate parking restrictions on the east side of Hampshire Avenue near the northwest driveway of Lenox Community Center. The requestor explained that buses and other large vehicles had difficulty pulling onto Hampshire Avenue due to vehicles parking too close to the driveway. In February 2020, the traffic committee reviewed the request to evaluate parking restrictions at that location. The committee recommended to restrict parking within 50 feet north and south of the driveway in question. The restrictions are recommended to better facilitate school bus movement from the community center. In April 2020, a letter was sent to the surrounding area looking for comments and concerns regarding the proposed parking changes. No comments were received. The letter was sent to over 170 addresses. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of enacting these controls is minimal and will come out of the general operating budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Resolution Location map Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4h) Page 2 Title: Traffic Study 726 – Authorize parking restrictions on Hampshire Avenue near Lenox Community Center Resolution No. 20-____ Authorizing parking restrictions on Hampshire Avenue near Lenox Community Center Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park received a request to evaluate parking restrictions on Hampshire Avenue near Lenox Community Center; and, Whereas, the traffic committee has reviewed the request and recommended the installation of parking restrictions on the east side of Hampshire Avenue within 50 feet of Lenox Community Center’s northwest driveway; and, Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the engineering director is hereby authorized to: • Install parking restrictions on the east side of Hampshire Avenue from 190 feet south of the south right of way line of Minnetonka Boulevard to 340 feet south of the south right of way line of Minnetonka Boulevard. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2020 Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 4h) Page 3 Title: Traffic Study 726 – Authorize parking restrictions on Hampshire Avenue near Lenox Community Center Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Public hearing: 6a Executive summary Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is categorized as Time-Sensitive** • Mayor to open public hearing, take testimony, and then close the public hearing. Policy consideration: Does the city council support the creation of a Housing Improvement Area for the South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association? Summary: The city is authorized by the state to establish HIAs as a finance tool for private housing improvements. An HIA is a defined area within a city where housing improvements are made and the cost of the improvements are paid in whole or in part from fees imposed on the properties within the area. The city adopted an HIA policy in 2001 and has previously established seven HIAs. The South Cedar Trails HIA proposal meets the intent of the city policy. In April 2020, the South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association (Association) submitted signed petitions from a majority of owners requesting the city council schedule a public hearing to establish the HIA and impose fees. Per state statute, cities may only establish an HIA when 50% or more of the association owners petition the city to do so. As of April 28, petitions have been received and validated from 88%, or 28 of the 32 owners. Following the petition process the association and city were notified of some windows and a garage door that did not need to be replaced. The city will work with the association and Ehlers to update the fee schedule prior to adoption of the resolution. Financial or budget considerations: HIA will be funded using an internal loan from the housing rehab fund. The total project cost, including soft costs is $623,300. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion Resolution Ordinance Prepared by: Marney Olson, assistant housing supervisor Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, housing supervisor; Karen Barton, CD director; Tim Simon, CFO Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 2 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Discussion Background: The city is authorized by the state to establish HIAs as a finance tool for private housing improvements. An HIA is a defined area within a city where housing improvements are made and the cost of the improvements are paid in whole or in part from fees imposed on the properties within the area. The city adopted an HIA policy in 2001 and has previously adopted seven HIAs. The South Cedar Trails HIA proposal meets the intent of the city policy. The association first expressed interest in learning about the HIA process in spring 2019 to assist with financing needed repairs. The association board began meeting with city staff April 2019. At the June 2019 association meeting the association voted 32-0 to move forward with the HIA. The association had urgent roof and siding repairs that need to be completed more quickly due to weather concerns and insurance requirements. With the tight timeline required the association passed an assessment of $7,000 per unit for the siding and roofing only and that work has been completed. The association conducted a physical needs assessment and financial plan review, known as a reserve study, to assist in making decisions related to property improvements. Per the city’s policy, HIA financial assistance is last resort financing and should not be provided to projects that have the financial feasibility to proceed without the benefit of HIA financing. The association’s current reserve does not cover the cost of the work needed and the association has been turned down by Belle Bank and Royal Credit Union for funding. On March 11, 2020 the city received the associations updated preliminary application for the HIA. In April 2020, the city and association hosted a virtual meeting with the owners to review the HIA process and walk through the petition that each homeowner received. Petitions submitted: The South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association submitted signed petitions from a majority of owners April 14 requesting the city council schedule a public hearing to establish the HIA and impose fees. Per state statute, cities may only establish an HIA when 50% or more of the association owners petition the city to do so. As of April 28, petitions have been received and validated from 88%, or 28 of the 32 owners. Filing an objection and veto period: Before the ordinance is adopted or at the hearing in which it is to be adopted, the owner of a housing unit in the proposed HIA may file a written objection with the city clerk asserting that the owners’ property should not be included in the HIA or should not be subjected to a housing improvement fee and objecting to the inclusion of the housing unit in the HIA, for the reason that the property would not benefit from the proposed improvements If residents of 45 percent or more of the housing units in the HIA file an objection to the ordinance with the city clerk before the effective date of the ordinance, the ordinance will not become effective. As of April 28, the city has not received any written objections to the HIA; however, one homeowner notified the city that they had made a down payment to the association on two windows and their garage door had already been replaced. The South Cedar Trails association has provided information to the city that five units made a down payment on windows and those windows were at 2019 prices, so the city will work with the association and Ehlers to update the fee schedule. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 3 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Funding: staff is recommending that the HIA loan be funded using internal funding based on the amount of the loan. The use of internal funds will earn interest income for the city and decrease the cost to the association compared to the cost of issuing bonds. The use of internal funds also allows owners the ability to pay off the balance of their fee in the future. The loan will come from the housing rehab budget. Association information: South Cedar Trails is located at 4401 - 4561 Cedar Lake Road. • The association is comprised of 32 townhomes built in 1977. • There are 17 units with two bedrooms and 15 units with three bedrooms. • The 2020 median estimated market value (EMV) is $202,150 and the range of EMV is $190,300-$216,800. • 20 of the 32 units (63%) are homesteaded. Analysis of application: The purpose of the city’s HIA policy is to establish the city’s position relating to the use of HIA financing for private housing improvements. The policy is used as a guide in processing and reviewing applications requesting HIA financing and is attached to this report. The current HIA proposal has been reviewed by staff and meets the city’s HIA policy and intentions of the housing improvement area state statute. The city’s financial advisor, Ehlers and Associates, and legal counsel, Kennedy and Graven, have reviewed the HIA financing to ensure it is within applicable state statute and financial requirements. 1. HIA meets city goals. The proposed improvements meet the city HIA goal of preserving and upgrading the existing housing stock in a neighborhood. 2. The city’s HIA policy states the average market value of units in the association should not exceed the maximum home purchase price for existing homes under the state’s first-time home buyer program which is currently $330,100. The home values in this association meet this requirement. Metropolitan council considers a home valued at $254,500 to be affordable at 80% AMI and $199,500 affordable at 60% AMI. All of the townhomes at South Cedar Trails are affordable at 80% and a portion are affordable at 60% AMI. 3. The association contracted with a third party to conduct a reserve study. The association received the reserve study report in September 2019. The study includes a physical and capital needs assessment and a financial analysis of the existing and projected financial situation. It also includes recommended increases to the association dues required to meet maintenance and capital improvement needs in the future. 4. Project costs are eligible for use of the HIA. The association went out for bids in 2019 and then received updated bids based on 2020 prices. All of the work proposed in the scope of work is eligible for use of the HIA. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 4 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Proposed scope of work scheduled for 2020. Site work Remove and replace parking lot. New landscaping and drainage to include a new French drain system, replacing retaining walls and new plant materials. Remove and dispose of existing fence and install new privacy fence. Garage Doors Remove and replace 31 garage doors. Windows Remove and replace windows in individual units. Total loan amount: The total loan amount is $623,300, comprising $598,300 for construction costs and $25,000 for city administrative, legal and financial costs. The term of the loan and imposed fees would be 15 years. South Cedar Trails HIA 15 Years Breakdown of capital costs Parking Lot $84,000 Landscaping/drainage $115,500 Fencing $80,850 Garage doors $27,300 Windows $263,070 Contingency (5%) $27,580 Total capital costs $598,300 Breakdown of soft costs City administrative fee $5,000 Legal fee $15,000 Financial advisor $5,000 Total $25,000 Total project costs $623,300 Preliminary estimates of the fees to be imposed on housing units in the South Cedar Trails Housing Improvement Area are based on an interest rate of 3.71%. This interest rate is subject to change based on market conditions. The fee schedule was prepared by Ehlers and Associates. 5. The city requires the majority of owners to support the HIA. The association board has been meeting with the association since spring of 2019 and the city has participated in two meetings with the HIA. Per submitted minutes the association members voted 32-0 in support of the HIA at their June 26, 2019 meeting. The association met the petitioning requirements with 88% of homeowners petitioning for the creation of the HIA. 6. HIA financing is necessary for this project. The association’s current reserve does not cover the work needed and the association has been turned down by two banks. This meets the requirement that HIA financial assistance is last resort financing. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 5 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) 7. Fees and loan terms. The fee per unit (prepayment amount) ranges from $11,257 - $22,404. The annual fee per unit if paid over the 15-year term will range from $1,041.66 - $2,073.13. If a homeowner does not prepay the HIA fee, their annual fee is calculated at 105% to cover delinquent or deferred payments. The interest rate is based on market conditions and is subject to change. Total Loan amount $623,300 Term (years) 15 Interest Rate 3.71% Average Annual Debt Service $52,682 Required coverage (105%) $55,316 Total units 32 If the HIA is approved, owners not prepaying would begin making payments with their 2021 real estate tax payments. Funding the loan internally allows owners flexibility in prepaying without interest or paying off the loan in the future. 8. Association’s desired method of fee imposition. State statute 428A.14 requires that “if a fee is imposed on a basis other than the tax capacity or square footage of the housing unit, the council must make a finding that the alternative basis for the fee is more fair and reasonable.” The association is requesting that fees be based as follows: The portion of the HIA fee attributable to common elements shall be divided evenly among the 32 housing units and the portion of the HIA fee attributable to windows shall be allocated based on the number of windows installed in each housing unit. City staff consulted with Kennedy and Graven regarding the basis of the fees which have been found to meet statutory requirements of being more fair and reasonable since it is consistent with the association’s HOA dues which are divided evenly among the 32 housing units and the windows are being calculated separately so homeowners only pay for widows they are having installed. Homeowner issues or concerns: The association held multiple meetings related to the proposed scope of work and costs associated with improvements. The association initially approved up to $800,000 for the HIA but the costs came in much lower. City staff met with the association in spring 2019 to give an overview of the HIA process and held a meeting in early April to walk through the petition and explain the petition and public hearing process. The city’s attorney, Kennedy and Graven, drafted the petition according to state statute and the city included an information piece explaining the process and fees. The signed petitions were submitted to the city and the city clerk and assistant housing supervisor reviewed, counted and verified the petitions. There were three petitions in question that the city consulted with Kennedy and Graven on and they were verified. The terms of the HIA loan provide a low interest, 15-year loan. The city also allows for hardship deferrals for low income seniors and low-income disabled owners. The hardship deferral allows the fee, including interest, to be deferred until the owner occupant sells or transfers title. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 6 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Hardship deferral information was included in the petition packet which was both mailed and emailed to homeowners. The HIA will be funded using an internal loan from the housing rehab fund. Funding the HIA with internal funding allows owners more flexibility in paying off the assessment in the future. The HIA process does allow for an objection and veto period. Although the city has not received any written objections to the creation of the HIA, the city is working with the association to remedy the window and garage door discrepancy of at least one homeowner. The city has consulted with Kennedy and Graven and the finalized numbers may not exceed the amount in the petition and notice of public hearing. City issues or concerns: The city is protected from financial risk in several ways: • Repayment of the loan is made through owner’s real estate tax payments. • In foreclosure events, tax liabilities including special assessments, must be paid by any party that purchases the unit. In cases of foreclosure, HIA fees have been treated the same as special assessments. • There is a 105% debt coverage as shown on the attached fee table. • A development agreement is required which will provide additional contractual conditions to ensure financial stability of the association including, but not limited, to requiring the use of professional property management and submitting annual audits. City staff have consulted with Kennedy and Graven to ensure all statutory requirements are met and Ehlers and Associates has prepared the HIA assessment structure and fee schedule. Next steps: The next step in the HIA process is first reading of the ordinance followed by the second reading/adoption of the ordinance and adoption of the resolution. May 18, 2020 June 1, 2020 First reading of ordinance Second reading/adoption of ordinance and adoption of resolution By June 6, 2020 Mail summary of ordinance to unit owners By July 1, 2020 Mail ordinance to Commissioner of Revenue. July 15, 2020 Veto period ends July 27, 2020 Prepayments due August 3, 2020 Housing rehab fund loan and development agreement approved August 4, 2020 Association can move forward with construction City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 7 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Resolution No. 20-____ Resolution approving a housing improvement fee for the South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area pursuant to Minnesota statutes, sections 428A.11 to 428A.21 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The City of St. Louis Park (the "city") is authorized under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 428A.11 to 428A.21 (the "Act") to establish by ordinance a housing improvement area within which housing improvements are made or constructed and the costs of the improvements are paid in whole or in part from fees imposed within the area. 1.02. The City Council of the city (the “council”) adopted a Housing Improvement Area policy on July 16, 2001 (the “HIA Policy”). 1.03. By Ordinance No. _________ adopted on June 1, 2020 (the "Enabling Ordinance"), the council has established the South Cedar Trails Homeowners Housing Improvement Area (the “South Cedar Trails HIA”) in order to facilitate certain improvements to property known as the "South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association, Inc." (the “Association”) all in accordance with the HIA Policy and the Act. 1.04. In accordance with Section 428A.12 of the Act, owners of at least 50 percent of the housing units within the South Cedar Trails HIA have filed petitions with the City Clerk of the city requesting a public hearing regarding imposition of a housing improvement fee for the South Cedar Trails HIA. 1.05. The council conducted a public hearing on May 4, 2020, duly noticed in accordance with Section 428A.13 of the Act, regarding adoption of this resolution at which all persons, including owners of property within the South Cedar Trails HIA, were given an opportunity to be heard. 1.06. The council finds that the South Cedar Trails HIA meets each of the approval criteria contained in the HIA Policy (listed as 5.01A- 5.01M), including the criterion that a majority of the condominium association owners support the project and the financing thereof. 1.07. Prior to the date hereof, the Association has submitted to the city a financial plan prepared by Cedar Management, Inc., an independent third party, that provides for the Association to finance maintenance and operation of the Common Elements in the Association (as defined in the Association’s bylaws) and a long-range plan to conduct and finance capital improvements therein, all in accordance with Section 428A.14 of the Act. 1.08. For the purposes of this resolution, the terms "South Cedar Trails HIA" and "Housing Improvements" have the meanings provided in the Enabling Ordinance. Section 2. Housing Improvement Fee Imposed. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 8 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) 2.01. The city hereby imposes a fee on each housing unit within the South Cedar Trails HIA (the "Housing Improvement Fee"), as specified in Exhibit A attached hereto, which is imposed for (i) Housing Improvements divided evenly among the housing units, and (ii) windows based on the number of windows installed in each unit, all as prescribed in the Amended and Restated Declaration of South Cedar Trails Association. 2.02. The council hereby finds that the Housing Improvement Fee for the Common Elements is imposed based on 1/32 ownership of the Common Elements, as provided in the Association’s bylaws. The Housing Improvement Fee is divided evenly among the 32 units in the South Cedar Trails HIA, with the exception of the portion of the Housing Improvement Fee allocated to windows, which is based on the number of windows installed in each unit. The Council expressly finds that this basis for allocation of costs aligns with the ownership and Association fee methodology in effect for the Association, and is thus more fair and reasonable than imposition of a Housing Improvement Fee on the basis of tax capacity or square footage. 2.03. Housing unit owners may prepay the Housing Improvement Fee in total and without interest thereon between the effective date of this resolution and July 27, 2020. The amount of the prepayment is shown under the heading “Total Cost (Prepayment Amount)” in Exhibit A attached hereto. Partial prepayment of the Housing Improvement Fee shall not be permitted. Prepayment must be made to the City Treasurer. Housing unit owners may also fully prepay the unpaid portion of their Housing Improvement Fee in any subsequent year. If a prepayment is made by November 15 of any year, the amount must include interest at the rate of 3.71% through the end of that calendar year. If the prepayment is made after November 15, the amount must include interest through the end of the following calendar year. 2.04. If the total Housing Improvement Fee is not paid between the effective date of this resolution and July 27, 2020, the Housing Improvement Fee shall be imposed as an annual fee, in the amount shown under the heading “Annual Fee” in Exhibit A. The Housing Improvement Fee shall be imposed in equal installments, beginning in 2021, for a period no greater than 15 years after the first installment is due and payable. The Annual Fee shall be deemed to include interest on the unpaid portion of the total Housing Improvement Fee. Interest at an annual interest rate of 3.71 percent per annum shall begin to accrue on the Housing Improvement Fee from the date of closing on the loan of city or Economic Development Authority funds to finance the Housing Improvements. The Annual Fee shall be structured such that estimated collection of the Annual Fee will produce at least five percent in excess of the amount needed to meet, when due, the principal and interest on the Housing Improvement Fee. 2.05. Unless prepaid between the effective date of this resolution and July 27, 2020, the Housing Improvement Fee shall be payable at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes, as provided in Sections 428A.15 and 428A.05 of the Act. As set forth therein, the Housing Improvement Fee is not included in the calculation of levies or limits on levies imposed under any law or charter. 2.06. A de minimis fee may be imposed by Hennepin County for services in connection to administration required in order for the fee to be made payable at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes. Section 3. Notice of Right to File Objections. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 9 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) 3.01. Within five days after the adoption of this resolution, the City Clerk is authorized and directed to mail to the owner of each housing unit in the South Cedar Trails HIA: a summary of this resolution, notice that owners subject to the Housing Improvement Fee have a right to veto this resolution if owners of at least 45 percent of the housing units within the South Cedar Trails HIA file a written objection with the City Clerk before the effective date of this resolution, and notice that a copy of this resolution is on file with the City Clerk for public inspection. Section 4. Effective Date. 4.01. This Resolution shall be effective 45 days after adoption hereof. Section 5. Filing of Housing Improvement Fee. 5.01. After July 28, 2020, the City Clerk shall file a certified copy of this resolution together with a final update of Exhibit A hereto to the Hennepin County Director of Taxation to be recorded on the property tax lists of the county for taxes payable in 2021 and thereafter. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council June 1, 2020. Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 10 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Exhibit A to Resolution No. 20-____ City of St. Louis Park Housing Improvement Area - South Cedar Trails HIA Assessment Allocation Association Unit No.Percentage Interest Total Common Area Construction Cost Total Financing & Soft Costs Total Construction Cost for 2 Windows Total Construction Cost for 3 Windows TOTAL COSTS (PREPAYMENT AMOUNT) * Annual Fee (105% of Total Costs) Total P & I Paid Per Unit (105%) - Non prepaid only 4401 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4405 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4409 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4413 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4417 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4421 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4425 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4429 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4433 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4437 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4441 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4445 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4449 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4453 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $1,934 $0 $13,191 $1,220.62 $18,309.34 4457 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4461 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4501 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4505 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $0 $11,257 $1,041.66 $15,624.95 4509 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $0 $11,257 $1,041.66 $15,624.95 4513 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4517 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4521 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4525 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $5,580 $0 $16,837 $1,558.00 $23,369.98 4529 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4533 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4537 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4541 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4545 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $11,147 $22,404 $2,073.13 $31,096.96 4549 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $8,538 $0 $19,795 $1,831.71 $27,475.68 4553 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $0 $11,257 $1,041.66 $15,624.95 4557 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $5,580 $0 $16,837 $1,558.00 $23,369.98 4561 0.03125 $10,476 $781 $0 $0 $11,257 $1,041.66 $15,624.95 GRAND TOTAL 100.00%$335,230.00 $25,000.00 $107,012.00 $156,058.00 $623,300.00 $57,675.93 $865,139.01 SOUTH CEDAR TRAILS HOUSING IMPROVEMENT AREA South Cedar Trails * Note: Annual fee amount is calculated based upon payment of total costs at 105% City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 11 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Ordinance No. ____-20 Ordinance establishing the South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 428A.11 to 428A.21 The City of St. Louis Park does hereby ordain: Section 1. Recitals. 1.01. The City of St. Louis Park (the "city") is authorized under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 428A.11 to 428A.21 (the "Act") to establish by ordinance a housing improvement area within which housing improvements are made or constructed and the costs of the improvements are paid in whole or in part from fees imposed within the area. 1.02. The City Council of the city (the “council”) adopted a Housing Improvement Area policy on July 16, 2001 (the “HIA Policy”). 1.03. The city has determined a need to establish the South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (South Cedar Trails HIA) as further defined herein, in order to facilitate certain improvements to property known as South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association, Inc. (the “Association"), all in accordance with the HIA Policy. 1.04. The city has consulted with the Association and with residents in the proposed South Cedar Trails HIA regarding the establishment of the South Cedar Trails HIA and the housing improvements to be constructed and financed under this ordinance. Section 2. Findings. 2.01. The council finds that, in accordance with Section 428A.12 of the Act, owners of at least 50 percent of the housing units within the proposed South Cedar Trails HIA have filed a petition with the City Clerk requesting a public hearing regarding the establishment of the South Cedar Trails HIA. 2.02. The council conducted a public hearing on May 4, 2020, duly noticed in accordance with Section 428A.13 of the Act, regarding adoption of this ordinance, at which all persons, including owners of property within the proposed South Cedar Trails HIA, were given an opportunity to be heard. 2.03. The council finds that, without establishment of the South Cedar Trails HIA, the Housing Improvements (as hereinafter defined) could not be made by the Association or the owners of housing units therein. 2.04. The council further finds that designation of the South Cedar Trails HIA is needed to maintain and preserve the housing units within such area. 2.05. The council further finds that by Resolution No. _____ adopted on the date hereof (the “Fee Resolution”), the city has provided full disclosure of public expenditures, loans, or other City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 12 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) financing arrangements in connection with the South Cedar Trails HIA, and has determined that the Association will contract for the Housing Improvements. 2.06. The city will be the implementing entity for the South Cedar Trails HIA and the Housing Improvement Fee (as set forth in the Fee Resolution and Section 5 below). 2.07. The council finds that the South Cedar Trails HIA meets each of the approval criteria contained in the HIA Policy (listed as 4.01A- 4.01N), including the criterion that a majority of the association owners support the project and the financing thereof. The Association presented evidence to the council adequate to demonstrate that these criteria were met, including presentation to the council of the petitions described in 2.01 above. Section 3. Housing Improvement Area Defined. 3.01. The South Cedar Trails HIA is hereby defined as the area of the city legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. 3.02. The South Cedar Trails HIA contains 32 housing units as of the date of adoption of this ordinance, along with garage units and common areas. Section 4. Housing Improvements Defined. 4.01. For the purposes of this ordinance, the Fee Resolution, and the South Cedar Trails HIA, the term "Housing Improvements" shall mean the following improvements to housing units, garages, and common areas within the South Cedar Trails HIA: remove and replace parking lot; new landscaping and drainage to include a new French drain system, replacing retaining walls and new plant materials; remove and dispose of existing fence and install new privacy fence; remove and replace 32 garage doors; remove and replace windows as needed in individual units. 4.02. The Housing Improvements shall also be deemed to include: (a) all administration, legal and consultant costs in connection with the South Cedar Trails HIA; (b) costs of arranging financing for the Housing Improvements under the Act; and (c) interest on the internal loan as described in Section 6.01. Section 5. Housing Improvement Fee. 5.01. The city may, by resolution adopt in accordance with the petitions, hearing and notice procedures required under Section 428A.14 of the Act, impose a fee on the housing units within the South Cedar Trails HIA, at a rate, term or amount sufficient to produce revenues required to finance the construction of the Housing Improvements (hereinafter referred to as the "Housing Improvement Fee"), subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Section. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 13 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) 5.02. The portion of the Housing Improvement Fee attributable to the Common Elements shall be divided evenly among the 32 housing units, and the portion of the Housing Improvement Fee attributable to windows shall be allocated based on the number of windows installed in each housing unit. 5.03. The Housing Improvement Fee shall be imposed and payable for a period no greater than 15 years after the first installment is due and payable. 5.04. Housing unit owners shall be permitted to prepay the Housing Improvement Fee in accordance with the terms specified in the Fee Resolution. 5.05. The Housing Improvement Fee shall not exceed the amount specified in the notice of public hearing regarding the approval of such fee; provided, however, that the Housing Improvement Fee may be reduced after approval of the Fee Resolution setting the Housing Improvement Fee, in the manner specified in such resolution. Section 6. Housing Improvement Area Loan. 6.01. At any time after a contract with the Association for construction of all or part of the Housing Improvements has been entered into or the work has been ordered, and the period for prepayment without interest of the Housing Improvement Fee has begun as described in Section 5.04 hereof, the council may begin disbursement to the Association of the proceeds of an internal loan (the “Loan”) of available city funds in the principal amounts necessary to finance the cost of the Housing Improvements that have not been prepaid, together with administrative costs. Section 7. Annual Reports. 7.01. No later than August 15, 2021, and each August 15 thereafter until there are no longer any outstanding obligations issued under the Act in connection with the South Cedar Trails HIA, the Association (and any successor in interest) shall submit to the City Clerk a copy of the Association's audited financial statements. 7.02. The Association (and any successor in interest) shall also submit to the city any other reports or information at the times and as required by any contract entered into between the Association and the city, or as the city may request. Section 8. Notice of Right to File Objections. 8.01. Within five days after the adoption of this ordinance, the City Clerk is authorized and directed to mail to the owner of each housing unit in the South Cedar Trails HIA: a summary of this ordinance; notice that owners subject to the proposed Housing Improvement Fee have a right to veto this ordinance if owners of at least 45 percent of the housing units within the South Cedar Trails HIA file a written objection with the City Clerk before the effective date of this ordinance; and notice that a copy of this ordinance is on file with the City Clerk for public inspection. Section 9. Amendment. 9.01. This ordinance may be amended by the council upon compliance with the public hearing and notice requirements set forth in Section 428A.13 of the Act. City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 14 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Section 10. This ordinance shall take effect 45 days after adoption hereof. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council June 1, 2020 Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading May 18, 2020 Second reading June 1, 2020 Date of publication June 11, 2020 Date ordinance takes effect July 15, 2020 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 6a) Page 15 Title: Public hearing on South Cedar Trails Homeowners Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Exhibit A to Ordinance No. ____-20 Legal description Lots 1-64, both inclusive, Block 1, South Cedar Trails, Hennepin County, Minnesota and Lot 65, Block 1, South Cedar Trails, Hennepin County, Minnesota Meeting: City council Meeting date: May 4, 2020 Action agenda item: 8a Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive Recommended action: **Due to the COVID-19 emergency declaration, this item is considered essential business and is categorized as a Required Action** •Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the installation of parking restrictions on the north side of the S County Road 25 Service Drive as well as the south side of the service drive within 50 feet of each intersection between Beltline Boulevard and Inglewood Avenue. Policy consideration: The installation of parking restrictions is allowed per the city’s established regulatory authority. Summary: In September 2019, staff received multiple requests to evaluate parking restrictions on the south County Road (CR) 25 Service Drive between Beltline Boulevard and Inglewood Avenue. A summary of the complaints received were the following: •Difficulty seeing oncoming vehicles when turning onto the service drive •Difficulty maneuvering large vehicles along the road with parked vehicles on both sides •Difficulty turning large vehicles onto the service drive from side streets •Trucks parking on-street for longer than 48 hours •Masking of business façade due to on-street parking In March 2020, the traffic committee discussed this request again with consideration on the comments received. The traffic committee recommended restricting parking fully on the north side of the service drive as well as on the south side within 30 feet of each intersection from Beltline Boulevard to Inglewood Avenue. The parking restrictions are recommended to allow for safer large vehicle movements (including trucks, deliveries, and buses) along the corridor. The restrictions also allow for increased sightlines and the prevention of vehicles impeding into the intersection. In the first round of feedback, 20 comments were received that ranged in their suggestions. In the second round of feedback, three comments were received, one for and two against the proposed parking restrictions. In both cases, the letters were sent to over 1100 addresses. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of enacting these controls is minimal and will come out of the general operating budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Resolution Location map Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager Page 2 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive Discussion Background: In September 2019, staff received multiple requests to evaluate parking restrictions on the south County Road (CR) 25 Service Drive between Beltline Boulevard and Inglewood Avenue. A summary of the complaints received were the following: •Difficulty seeing oncoming vehicles when turning onto the service drive •Difficulty maneuvering large vehicles along the road with parked vehicles on both sides •Difficulty turning large vehicles onto the service drive from side streets •Trucks parking on-street for longer than 48 hours •Masking of business façade due to on-street parking This corridor features areas of industrial, commercial, business park, residential, and planned unit development uses. Parking is currently allowed on both sides of the street for the segment in question. The service drive also carries Metro Transit’s Route 17F providing service from 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue to downtown Minneapolis. In October 2019, the traffic committee reviewed the request to evaluate the parking restrictions at that location. The committee recommended to gather feedback from the surrounding area to better guide a future recommendation. In late November 2019, a letter was sent to the area to all property owners, residents, and tenants outlining the complaints and possible solutions to mitigate these problems. Solutions ranged from timed parking restrictions to completely restricting all parking on the service drive. Staff received 20 comments, which are detailed at the end of the report. The comments advocated for a wide range of paths forward which included: •Restrict parking on the south side only •Restrict parking on the north side only •Restrict parking on both sides •Install timed parking restrictions •Restrict trucks from parking •Do not change anything The letter was sent to over 1100 addresses. In March 2020, the traffic committee discussed this request again with consideration on the comments received. The traffic committee recommended restricting parking fully on the north side of the service drive as well as on the south side within 30 feet of each intersection from Beltline Boulevard to Inglewood Avenue. The parking restrictions are recommended to allow for safer large vehicle movements (including trucks, deliveries, and buses) along the corridor. The restrictions also allow for increased sightlines and the prevention of vehicles impeding into the intersection. The traffic committee intentionally does not recommend to restrict trucks from parking on this corridor. According to the zoning code, semi-trucks and other industrial or commercial vehicles are allowed to park adjacent to non-residential uses such as industrial, business park, and commercial (all are represented on the corridor). It is legal for trucks to be parking in this corridor. Page 3 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive From State Statute, the definition of a “truck” means every motor vehicle designed, used or maintained primarily for the transportation of property (169.011 Subd. 88). There are many vehicles that are not tractor-trailer trucks that are also prohibited from parking on roads posted “no truck parking”. Trucks provide our residents and businesses deliveries and services. Such a restriction technically prevents all trucks from parking on these streets. Such restrictions would prohibit delivery trucks, moving trucks, and landscaping trucks from parking on the street. In addition, these restrictions are difficult to enforce. We have discussed this in the past with our police department and they would need to patrol specifically for truck traffic to cite violators. The city attorney indicated that if we were to actively enforce these restrictions, we would have to cite all vehicles in violation. The traffic committee did not recommend restricting all parking on the corridor due to the feedback received. Respondents noted the need for on-street parking both for commercial uses and for residential ones. The parking is used by properties to the south of the service drive rather than north. Rather than having all people parking on the opposite side of the street and then cross it, the south side was recommended for parking to decrease the amount of crossing needed. Additional parking restrictions or changes can be considered in the future. As with any traffic changes, we will continue to monitor traffic conditions and can make changes as they become necessary. In April 2020, a letter was sent to the area to all property owners, residents, and tenants outlining the recommendations and asking for further feedback. Staff received three comments in response to the letter. Two comments were against the proposed restrictions and one was for the restrictions. The letter was sent to over 1100 addresses. November 2019 letter comments (20 total): •The biggest problem consuming almost 100% of the problem is the semi trucks that park here overnight and sometimes for multiple days. There has only been one time that a semi with no trailer on it parked directly in front of our building. They were throwing trash on the ground around the truck and my landlord and caretaker were asking if anyone knew anything about it. But there are a lot of trucks that park here, sometimes up to 6 at a time. I’ve always wondered why they are even there. Now being that I live on this block that is up for potential parking restrictions, that concerns me. This is an 11 unit apartment building which would mean at least 11 vehicles. I believe half the building is 2 bedrooms and there are no children that live here. On average we have about 16 cars parked here at night. Our parking lot in the back is very small and only holds about 8 cars. So as you can see this would really cause us in this building a big problem if we aren’t able to park outside of our apartment. My recommendation would be to no longer allow the semis to park here for days on end. Parking for all cars to be only on the side of the road nearest to the buildings and farthest from the highway so that it allows most of the roadway to still be open for traffic as well as the 17F bus line to reach its stops easily. Page 4 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive We really need to keep some on street parking for the apartment complexes that have no other options. –Jenny, 4405 Highway 7 •Given the restrictions of the parking lots for businesses, for guests and visitors coming to Parkway 25, it would be difficult if no parking were allowed. I think the best option would be to allow parking on the south (building side) for easier access to sidewalks and safety during winter months and restrict parking via signage on the north side during the months with snow and then have less restrictions May-Sep or Oct or the summer months. Possibly have those areas on the north making it difficult or turning and such to limit it from the entire side. I have seen this as a way to address the issues that tend to be of greater significance given the season. –Kathy, 4015 County Road 25 •I have been living in Parkway 25 Apartments since November 2018 & I do believe evaluating the parking & making changes on this street is the best thing to do. There have been numerous times where sight lines have been an issue and someone making a turn couldn't see me & it becomes a "close call". Here are my thoughts: o Out front of Shoreham Apartments there is a no parking sign but people do not follow it - therefore it should be more properly enforced. o Out front of Parkway 25 Apartments there are indented parking spots - those seem to be fine. It is when people park outside of those, particularly, when they park close to the corner curbs that poses the issues. (In specific the curb on the SW side of the building & the curb on the West side headed into the back parking lot. People park o There should be 0 parking on the south side of the drive. When there is parking on the south side it narrows the roads and makes it impossible to shimmy around people on the road. This is a concern not just in front of the various apartment complexes but further east towards the stoplight on Ottawa Ave. where navigating the traffic coming off of 7 at the stops signs, is made more difficult when large trucks are blocking the sight lines. o There is a parking lot next to the psychology clinic but people hardly use it. There are always empty spots - if people actually using the designated parking lot would ease traffic/parking concerns. -Paige Gibson, 4015 County Road 25 •I was so happy to get a notice from the city about the parking situation on County Rd 25 services streets. I live on Monterey Ave adjacent to the North service street and this has been an issue for sometime. The semi parking on the south service street is constant on the weekend (they park Friday night and leave Monday morning) and clearly they are not residents who live near by as they get picked up and dropped off once they park their semis. I propose that the city outlaws parking by any vehicle with more than two Page 5 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive axels on both of the service drives, the roads were not designed to be parked on by vehicles that large. I think this would take care of 90% of the problem. I would still like residents to be able to park on the service drives as there are many apartments and condos that use that for parking and if there were no parking on those streets it would only cause parking issues on the streets off of the service road. The only other restriction that would make sense to me would be to restrict parking to one side of the street on both service roads as it does get a bit narrow if vehicles are parked on both sides of the street. –Bryant Jones •Please, please restrict parking, specifically that of trucks. Cars parking on one side is fine with ample room to turn near intersections. The trucks make driving down this road very difficult and dangerous, especially in the snow. –Jacob Levine, 3200 Inglewood Avenue, Apt 212 •I received a letter in the mail regarding enforcing parking restrictions on County Rd 25 Service Rd. I am a resident at Park Point Apartments in the 4320 building. It was unclear in the letter if it was talking about my service road or the service road on the other side of County Rd 25. If it is, in fact, the service road directly in front of my building, I would not be in favor of restricting all parking on the service drive or timed parking restrictions. This would be very difficult because most days there is not enough parking in our lot and I am forced to park on this service road. However, I am not opposed to enforcing parking on only one side of the street, if necessary. Although, I don't find that our side of the service road has many issues with cars getting through as we don't have many trucks and there is no bus line. I hope my insights help, and please let me know if you have any questions. –Katelyn Tessier •Hello! I work with West Title and last April we moved into the building. The location was a good choice for the central location to our clientele. First thing I noticed when we officially opened was the semi parking on the frontage road. It was intimidating and difficult to maneuver through. I knew that winter would become a larger issue with plowing and the snow berms that would be built around them. This has proven true and now the road has large ice patches that are difficult the traverse over. I recently suffered a flat tier after leaving work. I am not alone it this. A coworker and other vehicles I have witnessed similar fates. I believe these trucks are not only a nuisance but a hazard to the community. They make navigating the road difficult and scary being only one car path wide but also intimidating. They block visibility to our office and make it difficult for our clients to find us but generally benefit no one. I for one am for a restriction on this road. –Elizabeth Ogden •Firstly, I think the point should be made that this is now a populated residential area, no longer just industrial. This area’s residential population and traffic will be exploding in the next few years with all of the new apartment development, not to mention the completion of the SWLRT Beltline station. Now is the time to fix the current chaos. Page 6 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive The trucks have to go. They do more than block sight lines and narrow the street for drivers; they make pedestrian travel highly dangerous. I live at the Parkway 25 Apt building and I often walk to the local businesses. Not only are there no sidewalks, maneuvering around semi trucks in 2 way traffic is scary. There is no alternative walking route now that the bike and walking path is closed. In my opinion, restricting ALL parking on the service drive would be the smart thing to do. This would preemptively prepare for the future of this area for SWLRT, and would currently make it safer for all drivers and pedestrians. Also, I think sidewalks should be put on the priority list. –Colleen Dreher •I am in favor of restricting all parking along this service drive. The large semi trucks that park in front of the new bank, are extremely unsightly. I feel bad for that bank, and the landscaping they have done, because those trucks hide it from view. Although not the issue at hand, I would love to see parking on the north service drive (across county rd 25) be restricted to parking on one side. It gets very congested here, and two cars sometimes can’t pass when cars are parked on both sides. I appreciate the need for some parking here, due to the number of apartments. Also, sometimes cars park so close to Joppa and that it is difficult to see for turning onto the county road, or even continuing East. –Cato Rue •We at General Office Products would be in favor of these 2 possible solutions in order of preference: o -Restrict ALL parking on the service drive…at least from Beltline to Lynn Ave. o -Install a 2-hour restriction on the south side and no parking on the north. We believe a solution has to include both sides of the service road or the trucks will just park on the side that is not affected and the issues will continue unsolved –Dave Boss, 4521 Highway 7 •We have certainly noticed a large number of semis parked on (both sides of) the service road south of County 25. It makes it difficult to use the road and we support a restriction on parking like two hours only. –George and Julie Beck, 4015 County Road 25, No. 524 •Right now i have to park on the service drive because of lack of parking already on my street. with timed parking spot, restricting parking on certain part or the full on ban of street parking, its going to make it so i wont be able to park anywhere. I work till 1am everyday so by the time i get home all the parking on my street is taken, forcing me to park on the service drive. I personally don't see any of these problems that were in the letter happening, other then the truck parking on the other side of the highway. The problem with it masking of business facade is laughable to me for the fact that this is for the most part a very Page 7 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive residential area, by taking away parking its only going to hurt the people that live in this area.. We already struggle with finding parking, and with the snow restrictions (which i'm all for, to get the snow taken care of) it would just be impossible, or make it so we have to walk ten plus minutes for parking. –Taylor Jensen, 3042 Lynn Avenue •I own property on Highway 7, St Louis Park, MN 55416. Please get the name of my street right before you send me letters threatening to add parking restrictions. The issues you addressed in your letter only occurred due to construction at the Yeshiva of Minneapolis, while there was construction, and only on the block between Ottawa and Nachez. Since construction is completed the issues in your letter no longer exist, please do not add parking restrictions to my street. The city is already sending cops here at 4am every time it snows to give tickets to people; effectively adding another tax on residents every time it snows. Adding parking restrictions to my street is going to be used as an extra tax on me which will be enforced via arbitrary parking tickets while you're already raising my property taxes almost 7% this year. Please understand the issues you're dealing with and don't try to fix issues that you don't understand, which no longer exist, by making rules so you can charge hard working Americans with tickets after charging me up the ass with property taxes. –Daniel Abramowitz •I reviewed the options and would propose an additional option that I believe everyone would agree. Based on the overwhelming complaints regarding semi-trucks/trailers, if we could simply restrict these on this road, that should eliminate everyone’s issues. I believe if this was the 5th option on your letter, you would receive 100% of your responses suggesting this. –Michael Strub, 3059 Joppa Avenue •I am with West Title and we moved into our office April of 2019. Our location has been great for our clients and central for all which has been wonderful. Although we love our location it quickly became clear that the semis parking on the frontage road was going to be a problem. The visibility when pulling in and out of the parking lot is hindered due to the trucks locations. It’s honestly scary when there are semis parked on the frontage road blocking visibility of any other vehicles especially the ones entering from highway 7. It’s a gamble when you’re leaving our lot half the time because you can’t see around the semis for oncoming traffic. There’s been plenty of instances when both sides of the street are completely filled with trailers and semi-trucks leaving enough room for one vehicle to pass through at a time and limiting visibility again to incoming traffic. Now that winter is upon us it has only become worse with mounds of ice and snow from the plows. I really don’t believe the road was built for this type of parking and it affects our companies business and likely the tenants living in the nearby apartments. This should be a restricted parking zone for these semis as it is not only a safety issue but an environmental issue as well from them leaving their engines idling for hours on end. –Michele Felber Page 8 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive •I have lived at Park Point for over a year so I am very used to the roads nearby and the parking situation with our apartments. Our parking lot here is rather small, and does not fit every residents car in the lot. It is first come, first serve, as long as you have a parking permit and sticker. Because of this fact, many people do have to park on the service road, or Joppa Ave (which is also too small to fit all the extra residents). Any visitors also have to park on the street since they are not permitted in the parking lot. During winter, we have to all clear out of the parking lot for hours at a time to get it plowed after heavy snow. It usually takes about 4 hours to get the parking lot cleared, since the time frame for the plow getting here is not exact. Therefore, I think imposing certain restrictions on parking on County Road 25 Service Drive would cause many problems for all our residents. Installing the timed parking restrictions would be a problem since many of us have to park there overnight or all day if there is no room in the lot. And of course, restricting all parking on this road would be a lot worse. Many of us would simply have no where to park once our lot has filled up. This would also mean none of the residents could have visitors, since they cannot park in our lot either. I implore you to please only restrict one side of the service road if you must impose one of the restrictions. Our residents and our friends and family depend on the parking this road provides. –Bridget Novotny, 4300 Highway 7 •I completely agree with a few of the points in the letter. I have noticed that I could not see businesses and traffic on this road due to semi’s parked. One other point is that I have seen many cars racing to beat the light at Beltline and 25/7 crossroads from the Joppa crossing northeast on 25/7 and causing issues trying to pull out from the service road going south onto Beltline. As a driver and cyclist using the service roads on both sides regularly, this has concerned me. –Justin Mueller, 150 South 5th St, Suite 1000, Minneapolis •Here are some of my thoughts. o The main problem from our perspective is when large commercial trucks park right in front or our sign for days at a time. o I know, because I have called the owners of the trucks, that mostly the trucks are parked there by people who live in the Joppa side apartment building. o Most of the people parking on the street live in apartments--either to the east of us, or on Lynn Ave. o Staff (currently 5) from our office use street parking too-- During the day only. If you restricted parking on the street it could be a problem for us. o We can park in our parking lot when there is a snow emergency but generally reserve the parking lot for patients. o I could see a bit of a problem when there is heavy snow and people are parking on both the highway side and the North side of the street. One thought would be to require people to move their care from one side to the other so the plows can do their job. What if it were flagged as Snow Emergency Route or No Parking on South (in our case highway) side of the street from Nov to March. Page 9 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive It is a bit of a conundrum. If people moved off one side to allow you to plow, and you plow. And then they move to the other side, and you plow, it wouldn’t be a problem. I am against eliminating or limiting street parking on the frontage road. Except for trucks and briefly after deep snow its not really a problem. Timed parking – you mean meters? Bad idea. No overnight parking? You would piss off a lot of people. One side of the street until the plows go through would be good if there was a way to make it happen. –William Mason, 4330 Highway 7 •I am responding to the city's evaluation request for parking restrictions on County Road 25 Service Drive. I currently live at 4405 HWY 7 so my thoughts are only regarding the south side of the service drive. I'm not sure of what the city can or cannot do, if this is easier as a phone conversation please feel free to call me at [Redacted]. o Is there a way to restrict parking for residents only? o Restrict semi-truck parking to west of Lynn Ave o There is a bus sign at service rd & Lynn but it would be helpful to have a no parking sign 30 feet before the stop sign. This would help viability turning onto the service rd from Cty Rd 25. People run this stop sign more than they stop for it. This creates problem turning onto the service road from Cty Rd 25 because you do not know when people will stop at stop sign. I've told someone who parked right at the bus sign that a bus stops there and he replied no one reinforces it (doesn't make it right - he was one of the people who park in front of 4405 and walk down Lynn to the businesses). o Alternate side parking during snow emergencies - or only allow parking on one side of S service rd at all times (there's usually 4-6 cars parked outside regularly) o If all parking was restricted - or even weekdays or weekends - do you know what the solution would be for residents who live in the 4405 building? There are 11 units but not 11 parking spots (I understand that the city could say this isn't their problem). o If parking was restricted only on either S or N side, I'm thinking people would all park on one side and cross highway. Safety issue. o Can the service rd be marked with street sign? Creates confusion. -Melissa Rach •I am one of the closers that works for Michelle Balow at West title LLC. It is very frustrating to come into our office Monday through Friday and not have a place to park in front of our building. I am here by 7:00 a.m. every day and most days there is no parking available on the frontage road due to the semi’s being parked on the frontage road. My job requires that I am here early to start closings for multiple clients. A vast majority of our clients do request early closing times. –Karen Johnson, 4301 Highway 7, Suite 100 Page 10 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive April 2020 letter comments (3 total): •Unless I am missing something, your proposed parking recommendation will do nothing to solve the current problem. The semis will continue to park where they always do, on the south side of the frontage road in front of our building. This will continue to endanger our employees as they try to exit our property onto the frontage with no visibility and force vehicles to drive into oncoming traffic on the other side of the double yellow line, which you are not supposed to do because it is, in fact, a double yellow line. The frontage road is simply not adequate for semi parking. Please reconsider making the entire south side of the frontage road (West of Lynn Ave) no parking (in addition to the north side) or at least make it a 2 hour limit or no overnight parking. Thanks for your consideration. -Dave Boss, 4521 Highway 7 •We met in person months ago and I came in to express my concern about the trucks parking on the frontage road. I feel strongly about large trucks parking in front of housing and businesses. It makes it difficult to drive, bike, walk, see stop signs, avoid speeding oncoming traffic; and they are an eyesore. The 53" trucks make the area look like an industrial park. In other words, they are a unsightly nuisance. I have been biking around St Louis Park as I took the commitment to bike the 30 days of April. While biking about, I found that there is an enormous, empty parking lot behind the closed Sam's club location. There is plenty of parking in St. Louis Park for these HORRIBLE trucks to park. So, I strongly recommend that you restrict parking to one side of the Hwy 7/25 frontage road and ban truck parking. -Diana Cohen •Pete Skudgens of Slamhammer at Lynn Avenue and the S CR 25 Service Drive called to express how it’s impossible for his employees to park on the frontage road under the current conditions during the work week. During weekdays, the proposed parking restrictions will make it worse to park on the frontage road. Page 11 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive Resolution No. 20-____ Authorize parking restrictions on the south County Road 25 Service Drive Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park received multiple requests to evaluate parking restrictions on the south County Road 25 Service Drive from Beltline Boulevard to Inglewood Avenue; and, Whereas, the traffic committee has reviewed the requests and recommended the installation of parking restrictions on the north side of the south County Road 25 Service Drive from Beltline Boulevard to Inglewood Avenue; and, Whereas, the traffic committee also recommended the installation of parking restrictions on the south side of the south County Road 25 Service Drive within 50 feet of the intersections of Lynn Avenue, Joppa Avenue, and Inglewood Avenue; and, Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the engineering director is hereby authorized to: 1.Install parking restrictions on the north side of S County Road 25 Service Drive from Beltline Boulevard to Inglewood Avenue 2.Install parking restrictions on the south side of S County Road 25 Service Drive from 70 feet west of the west right of way line of Lynn Avenue to 50 feet east of the east right of way line of Lynn Avenue 3.Install parking restrictions on the south side of S County Road 25 Service Drive from 70 feet west of the west right of way line of Joppa Avenue to 50 feet east of the east right of way line of Joppa Avenue 4.Install parking restrictions on the south side of S County Road 25 Service Drive from 50 feet west of the west right of way line of Inglewood Avenue to 50 feet east of the east right of way line of Inglewood Avenue. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council May 4, 2020 Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Page 12 City council meeting of May 4, 2020 (Item No. 8a) Title: Traffic Study 718 – Authorize parking restrictions on the south CR 25 Service Drive