HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020/11/23 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
NOV. 23, 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 the local
emergency declaration issued by the city council, in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19)
pandemic and Governor Walz's “Stay Safe MN” executive order 20-056.
Some or all members of the St. Louis Park City Council will participate in the Nov. 23, 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 the meeting by video and audio at https://bit.ly/watchslpcouncil
or by calling +1-312-535-8110 meeting number (access code): 372 106 61 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.
6:30 p.m. – CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
1. 6:30 p.m. Labor negotiations strategy*
*Th is meeting will be closed as permitted by MN statute section 13D.03 to discuss the city’s
labor negotiation strategy related to the city ’s negotiations with the LELS (dispatch, patrol
and sergeant), IUOE Local 49 (maintenance) and IAFF (fire) unions.
7:30 p.m. – STUDY SESSION
Discussion items
1. 7:30 p.m. 2021 budget and capital improvement plan update
2. 9:00 p.m. Future study session agenda planning and prioritization
9:05 p.m. Update on COVID-19 (verbal)
9:20 p.m. Communications/updates (verbal)
9:25 p.m. Adjourn
Written reports
3. Police use of force policy work group update
4. Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
5. 2020 Census outreach final report
6. October 2020 monthly financial report
The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of city hall and on the text display
on civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952-924-2525.
Meeting: Closed Executive Session
Meeting date: November 23, 2020
Discussion item : 1
Executive summary
Title: Labor negotiations strategy
Recommended action: The city’s labor attorney Scott Lepak of the Barna, Guzy & Steffen law
firm will facilitate a discussion with the city manager and council regarding city labor relations
status with our five current bargaining groups and set strategy for upcoming negotiation
sessions.
Policy consideration: Does the city council have questions or need additional information
regarding negotiations strategy?
Summary: The city council, city manager and HR staff will discuss the city ’s negotiations
strategy in a closed executive session. The meeting will be closed as permitted by MN statute
13D.03 to discuss the city’s labor negotiation strategy related to the city’s negotiations with the
LELS (dispatch, patrol and sergeant), IUOE Local 49 (maintenance) and IAFF (fire) unions.
Supporting information will be sent to council under separate cover.
In accordance with Minnesota open meeting law, this meeting will be audio taped. The law
states:
“All closed meetings, except those as permitted by the attorney-client privilege, must be
electronically recorded at the expense of the public body. Unless otherwise provided by law,
the recordings must be preserved for at least three years after the date of the meeting.”
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR manager
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 23, 2020
Discussion item : 1
Executive summary
Title: 2021 budget and capital improvement plan update
Recommended action: No formal action required. This report is to provide city council with
information regarding 2021 budget, levy and capital plan.
Policy consideration: Does the City Council desire to set the 2021 final property tax levy at
$36,335,325 which is an increase of approximately 4.50% over the 2020 final property tax levy?
Summary: In September, council approved a preliminary property tax Levy of $36,895,000
which was 6.11% higher than the final 2020 levy. Based on the study session discussion on
October 12th staff worked to incorporate revenue adjustments and expenditure assumptions,
where appropriate, which resulted in lowering the necessary proposed levy increase for 2021
down to approximately 4.50% and soften the increase in levy projections for 2022.
Financial or budget considerations: Details regarding budget considerations are provided in
this report.
Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by
the city’s budget.
•St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to
create a more just and inclusive community for all.
•St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship.
•St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-
oriented development.
•St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their
way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
•St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through
community engagement.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Elizabeth Diaz , interim chief financial officer
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: 2021 budget and capital improvement plan update
Discussion
Background: The 2021 budget was developed with the City Council’s strategic goals, Vision 3.0,
and the comprehensive plan in mind. This is in addition to the need to maintain our aging
infrastructure (city roads, parks, buildings, etc.), and provide responsive and quality serv ice to
residents, which takes staff.
On September 21st , the City Council adopted the 2021 preliminary property tax levy of
$36,895,000, which was approximately 6.11% over the 2020 final property tax levy. Further
discussion with council occurred on October 12th. Through continued work and review of funds,
staff has adj usted the proposed levy to 4.50%
What are the overall important items of note for our discussion on updates for this study
session?
•Included in the preliminary budget and the revised budget are capital projects, as
revised by staff, salary contingency, climate action placeholder of $250,000 in the
development fund and increases in franchise fees.
•The revisions made to the capital projects assures that existing assets are maintained,
equipment is replaced as needed and does not eliminate any planned projects .
•The general fund balance continues to be within the policy framework of 45% of
subsequent year’s expenditures. All current and projected future debt service is met.
What is incorporated into revised projections for 2021?
•There was a $1.1M decrease in the 2021 Louisiana Ave Bridge project, due to the bid
being lower than estimated and an increase of $700,000 contribution from the state.
•Modifications to a street and local rehab project slated for 2021 including a reduction in
scope for the connect the park portion, which resulted in a decrease in project costs by
50%, or $510,000.
•Likewise, a connect the park project was reduced in cost by $300,000 and the project
delayed to 2021.
•As discussed at previous budget meetings, the staffing model for the fire department
was revised to shift from a mixture of part time and full-time fire fighters to 100% full
time firefighters. It is estimated that a total savings of $158,000 was accomplished
through reductions in part time salaries and overtime, as well as equipment charges.
Capital shifts and cost reductions
Park Improvement Fund. This fund accounts for park and park facility improvements. It is
funded by tax levy, park dedication fees and bonds as necessary. Prior to the current revisions,
it was determined that inflation in the projections for the Park Improvement Fund was included
in both the CIP and in the LRFMP so project costs were overstated. When the inflation
adjustment was realigned , park improvement capital costs were reduced.
•Some park projects were removed, and some projects were extended into the future
since they were not critical at this time . This reduces the pressure to issue bonds and
relieves future projected tax increases.
•Capital costs reductions and bringing ending fund balances in line with recommended
balances have reduced the anticipated future bonding from $10.1M to $6.4M.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: 2021 budget and capital improvement plan update
Capital Replacement Fund. This fund accounts for equipment, technology and building and
facilities. It is funded by tax levy and the 65% of tax increment that is redistributed by the
county annually from current redevelopment TIF districts where the obligations have been paid
in full. Staff completed an intensive review of capital needs. Equipment is analyzed on a three -
year rolling basis and was evaluated in order to balance the replacement schedule. Older pieces
of equipment require more intensive maintenance which increases operating costs. New pieces
of equipment result in lower maintenance costs in the near term.
• Staff reevaluated equipment and extended the service life for those pieces of
equipment that currently are not experiencing high maintenance costs. Thereby, where
appropriate, the life was extended on the replacement schedule and the estimate of
replacement costs were reduced in the near term.
• Estimates for equipment anticipated to be replaced in 2030 was also reevaluated and
refined.
• Through project cost reductions and timing shifts, capital needs decreased by
approximately $500,000 through 2029. Original proj ections indicated a need for
bonding in the future. Currently, funding for capital needs has been met through levy
adjustments and no bonding is necessary.
Pavement Management/MSA. This fund accounts for construction and maintenance of streets,
alleys and parking lots adjacent to city buildings. These projects are funded by franchise fees,
municipal state aid, grants and tax levy.
• Staff reevaluated projected capital improvements and adjusted the timing and/or scope
of the projects.
• For some projects, it was determined to use a mill and overlay versus reconstruction.
• In some instances, the number of pavement segments included in the projects was
reduced or delayed.
• In all cases, decisions to adjust projects were made with consideration of pavement
condition goals.
• Through project cost reductions and timing shifts, total capital costs decreased, which
allowed for a reduction of anticipated bonding from $16.7M to $11M.
Sidewalk and Trails. This fund accounts for the construction of connect the park; bikeways,
sidewalks, trails, and bridges, as well as new sidewalks proposed as a part of pavement
management projects
• Originally the timing of connect the park projects were projected to be completed in
2027.
• Through revisions and reevaluation, standalone connect the park projects were slowed
and now extend through 2037. More discussion on connect the park will take place over
the coming months.
• In addition, the timing and projected costs for new sidewalk construction included with
street projects were adjusted by reducing the anticipated expense or delaying an
adjacent connect the park segment to a future date .
• Through e valuation and review of projects, total bonding needs have decreased from
$35M to $18.5M.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: 2021 budget and capital improvement plan update
Bonding Summary
Before adjustments, the anticipated bonding needs were
After adjustments, anticipated bonding is:
Property Tax Impact
The table below illustrates the difference between the preliminary levy increase of 6.11% to the
revised 4.5% levy and a 4.96% option (same as the 2020 levy increase) for a median valued home .
All of the impacts shown below incorporate all the changes and adjustments discussed above.
City of St. Louis Park
Summary Table of Levy Impacts
Levy Increase 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 10 Year Ave
73.30$ 15.99$ 93.40$ 76.98$ 87.85$ 82.50$ 58.97$ 43.87$ 5.89$ 46.74$ 15.48$ 52.77$
4.96%4.50%6.37%5.06%5.67%4.88%3.24%3.23%2.47%2.39%2.32%4.01%
Capital Increase / (Decrease)N/A (255,000) N/A
73.30$ 21.99$ 87.40$ 76.98$ 87.85$ 82.28$ 58.73$ 43.62$ 5.63$ 46.72$ 15.48$ 52.67$
4.96%4.96%5.90%5.06%5.67%4.86%3.23%3.21%2.45%2.39%2.32%4.01%
Capital Increase / (Decrease)N/A (95,000) N/A
73.30$ 36.97$ 72.42$ 74.01$ 83.83$ 84.28$ 61.03$ 46.25$ 8.52$ 46.76$ 15.47$ 52.95$
4.96%6.11%4.75%4.86%5.42%5.01%3.37%3.37%2.62%2.39%2.32%4.02%
Capital Increase / (Decrease)N/A 305,000 N/A
4.50%
4.96%
6.11%
N/A
N/A
N/A
The breakdown of the 4.50% revised and proposed property tax l evy by fund is shown below:
The revised proposed 2021 levy represents a $559,675 decrease from the preliminary levy
adopted in September.
Grand
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total
Park Imp 2,300,000 1,500,000 750,000 850,000 1,000,000 700,000 1,700,000 1,300,000 10,100,000
Pavement Mgmt 1,200,000 - 4,400,000 7,000,000 - 2,000,000 2,100,000 - 16,700,000
CTP 11,500,000 2,200,000 3,000,000 4,400,000 4,500,000 7,800,000 2,300,000 - 35,700,000
Capital Repl - - - - - - - 1,000,000 1,000,000
Total 15,000,000 3,700,000 8,150,000 12,250,000 5,500,000 10,500,000 6,100,000 2,300,000 63,500,000
Bonding Summary
Grand
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 Total
Park Imp 1,300,000 500,000 - 500,000 500,000 1,600,000 1,500,000 500,000 6,400,000
Pavement Mgmt 700,000 - 5,300,000 5,000,000 - - - - 11,000,000
CTP 10,000,000 - 800,000 1,700,000 3,200,000 500,000 1,600,000 700,000 18,500,000
Capital Repl - - - - - - - - -
Total 12,000,000 500,000 6,100,000 7,200,000 3,700,000 2,100,000 3,100,000 1,200,000 39,700,000
Bonding Summary
2020 $ change 2021 % Change
Tax Capacity Based Levy Final Levy 2020 to 2021 Proposed 2020 to 2021
General Fund 28,393,728$ 1,208,083$ 29,601,811$ 4.25%
Park Improvement 860,000 - 860,000 0.00%
Capital Replacement 1,567,700 (255,000) 1,312,700 -16.27%
Debt Serice-current 3,799,093 611,721 4,410,814 16.10%
Employee Benefit Fund 150,000 - 150,000 0.00%
Housing Rehabilitation Fund
Total 34,770,521$ 1,564,804$ 36,335,325$ 4.50%
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: 2021 budget and capital improvement plan update
Additional tax levy information: The City Council approved 2021 preliminary property tax
levies in September according to statute and that preliminary lev y has been sent to Hennepin
County for certification. Hennepin County mailed parcel specific notices to taxpayers. Final
action on the 2021 budget, 2021 final city p roperty tax levy, f inal 2021 HRA Levy, and 2021 –
2030 CIP will occur in December.
Next steps: As the 2021 budget process continues, the following preliminary schedule has been
developed for Council:
December 7 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and budget presentation.
December 14 (If needed) - Public Hearing continuation and any budget discussion.
December 21 Council adopts 2020 Revised Budget, 2021 Budgets, final tax levies
(City and HRA), and 2021 - 2030 CIP.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 23, 2020
Discussion item : 2
Executive summary
Title: Future study session agenda planning and prioritization
Recommended action: The city council and city manager to set the agenda for the regularly
scheduled study session on Dec. 14, 2020.
Policy consideration: Not applicable.
Summary: This report summarizes the proposed agenda for the regularly scheduled study session
on Dec. 14, 2020. Also attached to this report is the study session discussion topics and timeline.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Tentative agenda – Dec. 14, 2020
Study session discussion topics and timeline
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, administrative services office assistant
Reviewed by: Maria Solano, senior management analyst
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Future study session agenda planning and prioritization
Dec. 14, 2020.
6:30 p.m. Study session - To be held via videoconference
Tentative discussion items
1.City Council operations overview – administrative services (60 minutes)
City Attorney Soren Mattick will be present to provide a review of city council operations to
include information related to minutes, data practices, open meeting law, carver governance
etc.
2.SWLRT Wooddale Station developer presentation – community development (60 minutes)
The staff -recommended developer for the redevelopment of the EDA-owned property
adjacent to the Wooddale light rail station will be presenting their proposed project to the
council/EDA. Staff will be seeking feedback from council/EDA regarding the recommended
developer and development proposal.
3.Future study session agenda planning – administrative services (5 minutes)
Communications/meeting check-in – administrative services (5 minutes)
Time for communications between staff and council will be set aside on every study session
agenda for the purposes of information sharing.
Written reports
4.Minnetonka Blvd. redevelopment
5.St. Louis Park Friends of the Arts annual report
6.Efficient building benchmarking ordinance - year one in review
7.Solar Sundown program
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: Future study session agenda planning and prioritization
Study session discussion topics and timeline
Future council items
Priority Discussion topic Comments Timeline for council
discussion
3 Discuss public process expectations
and outcomes
Staff is working on the approach for
undertaking this discussion. 1st qtr. 2021
4 Revisit housing setback, FAR , &
more related to affordable housing Going to planning commission for discussion. 1st qtr. 2021
5 Home-based businesses (HBB ) 1st qtr. 2021
6 Public forums at council mtgs 9/23/19 SS. Staff doing research of other cities. 1st qtr. 2021
8 Community and neighborhood
sidewalk designations To be combined w/ Connect the Park discussion. 2nd qtr. 2021
9 Remove mint & menthol
exemption from existing flavored
On hold pending court decision *On hold
10/13
-Easy access to nature, across
city, starting w/ low-income
neighborhoods
-WHNC Access Fund
Combine P10 and P13 .
*On hold pending direction from school district. *On hold
11 Conversion therapy ban TBD
+
Creating pathways to
homeownership for BIPOC
individuals and families
TBD
+ Youth on commissions 4th qtr. 2020
Council items in progress
Priority Discussion topic Comments Next Steps
7 STEP discussion: facilities Council asked staff to consider lending options
to assist STEP in buying a new bldg.
STEP is searching
for a new facility
Police use of force policy review Discussed 7/27 & 9/29/20. Written report
11/23/20
Policing: structural analysis Discussed 7/27 & 9/29 /20. Staff is developing
process.
Discuss draft action
plan; date TBD
R evitalization of Walker Lake area
Council approved updated parking ord. Dec.
2019; Planning Commission working on new
zoning ord. and design guidelines for the
district – recommendation to council Q4;
Construction of phase 1 completed summer
2019; Phase 2 currently under construction
Discussion of
ordinance and
design guidelines
late 2020
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 23, 2020
Written report: 3
Executive summary
Title: Police use of force policy work group update
Recommended action: None at this time . The purpose of this report is to provide council an
overview on the work undertaken by a work group that was created to help guide the required
update to the police departments use of force policy.
Policy consideration: Does the council need additional information on the police departments
use of force policy update ?
Summary: Following the murder of George Floyd, the council asked to review the police
departments use of force policy in St. Louis Park. During the July 27 study session, the
department provided an overview of its policies , reviewed the 8 Can’t Wait policy
recommendations, and update d the council on the Minnesota police accountability act. This
new legislation requires all law enforcement agencies in Minnesota to update their use of force
policy to be the same or substantially similar to the model policy provided by the Board of
Police Officers Standards and Training. The council approved of developing a workgroup
consisting of members of the police advisory commission, human rights commission and the
multi-cultural advisory committee to work with staff on updating the policy.
Staff met with the three commission s to review the current use of force policy and requested
volunteers to assist with a work group on updating the policy as required by statute. A work
group consisting of ten community members representing e ach of the commissions was formed.
The work group was provided with the department’s current use of force policy and the model
policy provided by the Board of Police Officers Standards and Training prior to the first work
group meeting. The work group has meet virtually twice and has its last scheduled meeting set
for Nov. 24, 2020. The workgroup has reviewed the policy, engaged in policy discussions,
provided updates to their commissions and has provided valuable community input to the
department on policy recommendations. Staff has incorporated the policy recommendations
into the attached draft of the updated use of force policy. It is anticipated the workgroup will
complete a final review of the draft and make a recommendation for the department to adopt
the draft policy. Staff will then begin training officers on the updated policy before the statutory
required Dec. 15, 2020 deadline .
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
Supporting documents:
•Board of Police Officers Standards and Training use of force model policy
•St. Louis Park Police Department current use of force policy
•Draft - St. Louis Park Police Department use of force policy
Prepared by: Mike Harcey, police chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Approved by the POST Board August 17, 2020
1 Rev. 7/20
USE OF FORCE AND DEADLY FORCE MODEL
POLICY
MN STAT 626.8452
1)PURPOSE
It is the policy of the (law enforcement agency) to provide officers with guidelines for
the use of force and deadly force in accordance with:
MN STAT 626.8452 DEADLY FORCE AND FIREARMS USE;
POLICIES AND INSTRUCTION REQUIRED;
MN STAT 626.8475 DUTY TO INTERCEDE AND REPORT;
MN STAT 609.06 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE;
MN STAT 609.065 JUSTIFIABLE TAKING OF LIFE; and
MN STAT 609.066 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE BY PEACE OFFICERS.
2)POLICY
It is the policy of this law enforcement agency to ensure officers respect the sanctity of
human life when making decisions regarding use of force. Sworn law enforcement
officers have been granted the extraordinary authority to use force when necessary to
accomplish lawful ends. Officers shall treat everyone with dignity and without prejudice
and use only the force that is objectively reasonable to effectively bring an incident
under control, while protecting the safety of others and the officer.
Officers shall use only that amount of force that reasonably appears necessary given
the facts and circumstances perceived by the officer at the time of the event to
accomplish a legitimate law enforcement purpose.
Officers should exercise special care when interacting with individuals with known
physical, mental health, developmental, or intellectual disabilities as an individual's
disability may affect the individual's ability to understand or comply with commands
from peace officers.
The decision by an officer to use force or deadly force shall be evaluated from the
perspective of a reasonable officer in the same situation, based on the totality of the
circumstances known to or perceived by the officer at the time, rather than with the
benefit of hindsight, and that the totality of the circumstances shall account for
occasions when officers may be forced to make quick judgments about using such
force.
This policy is to be reviewed annually and any questions or concerns should be
addressed to the immediate supervisor for clarification.
This policy applies to all licensed peace officers and part-time peace officers engaged
in the discharge of official duties.
Section (4) Procedure, paragraphs (g.1-2), are effective March 1, 2021 and
thereafter.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 2
Approved by the POST Board August 17, 2020
2 Rev. 7/20
3)DEFINITIONS
a)Bodily Harm: Physical pain or injury.
b)Great Bodily Harm: Bodily injury which creates a high probability of death, or which
causes serious, permanent disfigurement, or which causes a permanent or protracted
loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ or other serious bodily
harm.
c)Deadly Force: Force used by an officer that the officer knows, or reasonably should know,
creates a substantial risk of causing death or great bodily harm. The intentional discharge
of a firearm in the direction of another person, or at a vehicle in which another person is
believed to be, constitutes deadly force.
d)De-Escalation: Taking action or communicating verbally or non-verbally during a
potential force encounter in an attempt to stabilize the situation and reduce the immediacy
of the threat so that more time, options, and resources can be called upon to resolve the
situation without the use of force or with a reduction in the force necessary. De-escalation
may include the use of such techniques as command presence, advisements, warnings,
verbal persuasion, and tactical repositioning.
e)Other Than Deadly Force: Force used by an officer that does not have the purpose of
causing, nor create a substantial risk of causing, death or great bodily harm.
f)Choke Hold: A method by which a person applies sufficient pressure to a person to
make breathing difficult or impossible, and includes but is not limited to any pressure to
the neck, throat, or windpipe that may prevent or hinder breathing, or reduce intake of
air. Choke hold also means applying pressure to a person's neck on either side of the
windpipe, but not to the windpipe itself, to stop the flow of blood to the brain via the
carotid arteries.
g)Authorized Device: A device an officer has received permission from the agency to carry
and use in the discharge of that officer’s duties, and for which the officer has:
a.obtained training in the technical, mechanical and physical aspects of the
device; and
b.developed a knowledge and understanding of the law, rules and
regulations regarding the use of such a device.
4)PROCEDURE
a)General Provisions
1.Use of physical force should be discontinued when resistance ceases or
when the incident is under control.
2.Physical force shall not be used against individuals in restraints, except as
objectively reasonable to prevent their escape or prevent imminent bodily
injury to the individual, the officer, or another person. In these situations, only
the amount of force necessary to control the situation shall be used.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 3
Approved by the POST Board August 17, 2020
3 Rev. 7/20
3.Once the scene is safe and as soon as practical, an officer shall provide
appropriate medical care consistent with his or her training to any individual
who has visible injuries, complains of being injured, or requests medical
attention. This may include providing first aid, requesting emergency medical
services, and/or arranging for transportation to an emergency medical facility.
4.All uses of force shall be documented and investigated pursuant to this
agency’s policies.
b)Duty to Intercede
Regardless of tenure or rank, an officer must intercede when:
a.present and observing another officer using force in violation of
section 609.066, subdivision 2, or otherwise beyond that which is
objectively reasonable under the circumstances; and
b.physically or verbally able to do so
c)Duty to Report
An officer who observes another officer use force that exceeds the degree of
force permitted by law has the duty to report the incident in writing within 24
hours to the chief law enforcement officer of the agency that employs the
reporting officer.
d)De-escalation:
1.An officer shall use de-escalation techniques and other alternatives to higher
levels of force consistent with their training whenever possible and appropriate
before resorting to force and to reduce the need for force.
2.Whenever possible and when such delay will not compromise the safety of
another or the officer and will not result in the destruction of evidence, escape of
a suspect, or commission of a crime, an officer shall allow an individual time and
opportunity to submit to verbal commands before force is used.
e)Use of Other Than Deadly Force
1.When de-escalation techniques are not effective or appropriate, an officer
may consider the use of other than deadly force to control a non-compliant or
actively resistant individual. An officer is authorized to use agency-approved
other than deadly force techniques and issued equipment in the following
circumstances:
a.effecting a lawful arrest; or
b.the execution of legal process; or
c.enforcing an order of the court; or
d.executing any other duty imposed upon the public officer by law; or
e.defense of self or another.
f)Use of Certain Types of Force
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 4
Approved by the POST Board August 17, 2020
4 Rev. 7/20
1.Except in cases where deadly force is authorized as articulated in MN STAT.
609.066 to protect the peace officer or another from death or great bodily
harm, officers are prohibited from using:
a.Chokeholds,
b.Tying all of a person’s limbs together behind a person’s back to
render the person immobile, or;
c.Securing a person in any way that results in transporting the person
face down in a vehicle.
2.Less than lethal measures must be considered by the officer prior to applying
these measures.
g)Use of Deadly Force
1.An officer is authorized to use deadly force if an objectively reasonable officer
would believe, based on the totality of the circumstances known to the officer
at the time and without the benefit of hindsight, that such force is necessary.
Use of deadly force is justified when one or both of the following apply;
a.To protect the peace officer or another from death or great bodily
harm, provided that the threat:
i.can be articulated with specificity by the law enforcement
officer;
ii.is reasonably likely to occur absent action by the law
enforcement officer; and
iii.must be addressed through the use of deadly force without
unreasonable delay; or
b.To effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person
whom the peace officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe
has committed or attempted to commit a felony and the officer
reasonably believes that the person will cause death or great bodily
harm to another person under the threat criteria in paragraph (a),
items (i) to (iii), unless immediately apprehended.
2.An officer shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger
the person poses to self if an objectively reasonable officer would believe,
based on the totality of the circumstances known to the officer at the time and
without the benefit of hindsight, that the person does not pose a threat of
death or great bodily harm to the peace officer or to another under the threat
criteria in paragraph (1a), items (i) to (iii).
3.Where feasible, the officer shall identify themselves as a law enforcement
officer and warn of his or her intent to use deadly force.
h)Training
1.All officers shall receive training, at least annually, on this agency’s use of
force policy and related legal updates.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 5
Approved by the POST Board August 17, 2020
5 Rev. 7/20
2.In addition, training shall be provided on a regular and periodic basis and
designed to
a.Provide techniques for the use of and reinforce the importance of de-
escalation
b.Simulate actual shooting situations and conditions; and
c.Enhance officers’ discretion and judgement in using other than deadly
force in accordance with this policy.
3.Before being authorized to carry a firearm all officers shall receive training
and instruction with regard to the proper use of deadly force and to the
agency’s policies and State statutes with regard to such force. Such training
and instruction shall continue on an annual basis.
4.Before carrying an authorized device all officers shall receive training and
instruction in the use of the device including training as it relates to its use in
deadly force and/or other than deadly force situations. Such training and
instruction shall continue on an annual basis.
5.Officers will carry and use only authorized devices unless circumstances exist
which pose an immediate threat to the safety of the public or the officer
requiring the use of a device or object that has not been authorized to counter
such a threat.
6.With agency approval officers may modify, alter or cause to be altered an
authorized device in their possession or control.
g)Recordkeeping Requirements
The chief law enforcement officer shall maintain records of the agency’s compliance with
use of force training requirements.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 6
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 7
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 8
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 9
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 10
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 11
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 12
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 13
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 14
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 15
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 16
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 17
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 18
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 19
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 20
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 21
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 22
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 23
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 24
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 25
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 26
1
Rev 111220
Chapter 6 - USE OF FORCE
6.1.0 POLICY PURPOSE
It is the policy of the St. Louis Park Police Department to provide officers with guidelines for the use of
force and deadly force in accordance with:
MN STAT 626.8452 DEADLY FORCE AND FIREARMS USE; POLICIES AND
INSTRUCTION REQUIRED;
MN STAT 626.8475 DUTY TO INTERCEDE AND REPORT;
MN STAT 609.06 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE;
MN STAT 609.065 JUSTIFIABLE TAKING OF LIFE; and
MN STAT 609.066 AUTHORIZED USE OF FORCE BY PEACE OFFICERS.
6.1.1 POLICY
Every person has the right to be free from excessive use of force by officers acting under the color of
law. In accordance with our mission and values as an agency, we are committed to building and
maintaining partnerships with the community we serve, to transparency, to fundamental fairness, to
treating everyone with respect and dignity and to listening to the voices of the community.
Sworn law enforcement officers have been granted the extraordinary authority to use force when
necessary to accomplish lawful ends. It is the policy of this law enforcement agency to ensure officers
respect the sanctity of human life when making decisions regarding use of force. Officers shall treat
everyone with dignity and without prejudice. Officers shall use only that amount of force that
reasonably appears necessary given the facts and circumstances perceived by the officer at the time of
the event to accomplish a legitimate law enforcement purpose, and to protect the safety of others and
the officer.
Officers should exercise special care when interacting with individuals with known or perceived physical,
mental health, developmental, or intellectual disabilities as an individual’s disability may affect the
individual’s ability to understand or comply with commands from peace officers.
It is the intent of this policy that officers use deadly force only when necessary in defense of human life
or to prevent great bodily harm. The decision by an officer to use force or deadly force shall be
evaluated from the perspective of a reasonable officer* in the same situation, based on the totality of
the circumstances known to or perceived by the officer at the time, rather than with the benefit of
hindsight, and that the totality of the circumstances shall account for occasions when officers may be
force to make quick judgements about using such force.
This policy is to be reviewed annually and any questions or concerns should be addressed to the
immediate supervisor for clarification.
Violations of this policy may result in progressive discipline up to and including suspension, termination
of employment, civil or criminal penalties as required by law.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 27
2
Rev 111220
This policy applies to all licensed peace officers and part-time peace officers engaged in the discharge of
official duties.
Section (6.2.1) Procedure, paragraphs 7 (a) and (b), are effective March 1, 2021 and thereafter.
*In Graham v. Connor, the courts defined this reasonable officer standard - The Fourth Amendment
“reasonableness” inquiry is whether the officers’ actions are “objectively reasonable” in light of the facts
and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivation. The
“reasonableness” of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable
officer on the scene, and its calculus must embody an allowance for the fact that police officers are
often forced to make split-second decisions about the amount of force necessary in a particular
situation.
DEFINITIONS AND USE OF DEADLY FORCE
6.1.2 DEFINITIONS:
1)Force:
Intentional actions by an officer that the officer knows, or reasonably should know, is likely to
cause a nonconsensual, harmful, or offensive bodily contact with another, or places another in
imminent fear of a nonconsensual, harmful, or offensive bodily contact.
2)Bodily Harm:
Physical pain or injury.
3)Great Bodily Harm:
Bodily injury which creates a high probability of death, or which causes serious, permanent
disfigurement, or which causes a permanent or protracted loss or impairment of the function of
any bodily member or organ or other serious bodily harm.
4)Deadly Force:
Force used by an officer that the officer knows, or reasonably should know, creates a substantial
risk of causing death or great bodily harm. The intentional discharge of a firearm in the direction
of another person, or at a vehicle in which another person is believed to be, constitutes deadly
force.
5)De-Escalation:
Taking action or communicating verbally or non-verbally during a potential force encounter in
an attempt to stabilize the situation and reduce the immediacy of the threat so that more time,
options, and resources can be called upon to resolve the situation without the use of force or
with a reduction in the force necessary. De-escalation may include the use of such techniques
as command presence, advisements, warnings, verbal persuasion, and tactical repositioning.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 28
3
Rev 111220
6)Other Than Deadly Force:
Force used by an officer that does not have the purpose of causing, nor create a substantial risk
of causing, death or great bodily harm.
7)Choke Hold:
A method by which a person applies sufficient pressure to a person to make breathing difficult
or impossible, and includes but is not limited to any pressure to the neck, throat, or windpipe
that may prevent or hinder breathing, or reduce intake of air. Choke hold also means applying
pressure to a person's neck on either side of the windpipe, but not to the windpipe itself, to stop
the flow of blood to the brain via the carotid arteries. (MS 609-06-3-b)
8)Authorized Device:
A device an officer has received permission from the agency to carry and use in the discharge of
that officer's duties, and for which the officer has:
a)Obtained training in the technical, mechanical, and physical aspects of the device, and
b)Developed a knowledge and understanding of the law, rules, and regulations regarding
the use of such device.
9)Chemical Aerosol:
A chemical containing Orthochlorbenzalmalmalononitrile (CS) and / or Oleoresin Capsicum (OC)
in a handheld container disseminated with a liquid or gas propellant.
10)Chemical Munitions:
A chemical containing Orthochlorbenzalmalmalononitrile (CS), Oleoresin Capsicum (OC), and
Hexachloroethane (HC - Smoke) disseminated in a projectile with a liquid carrier or a
pyrotechnic (burning) grenade.
11)Contact Weapons:
All objects and instruments that are used, or are designed to be used, to apply force to another
by coming into physical contact with that person. Contact weapons include, but are not limited
to, police batons and flashlights.
12)Conducted Electrical Weapon (CEW) (i.e., Taser):
The conducted electrical weapon is designed to disrupt a subject's central nervous system by
means of deploying battery powered electrical energy sufficient to cause muscle contractions
and override an individual's voluntary motor responses.
13)Positional Asphyxiation:
Positional (postural) asphyxia is a form of mechanical asphyxia that occurs when a person is
immobilized in a position which impairs adequate pulmonary ventilation and thus, results in a
respiratory failure. In some cases, the body position has a direct hindering effect on normal
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 29
4
Rev 111220
circulation and venous return to the heart, which may be additional contributing factors to the
obstruction of normal gas exchange (definition from US NIH).
6.1.3 PROCEDURE:
1)General Provisions
a)Officers shall use the least amount of force reasonably necessary to accomplish the
intended objective without impairing the safety of others. This provision shall not be
construed, however, to require officers to first attempt using types and degrees of force
which reasonably appear to be inadequate to accomplish the intended objective.
b)Protracted hand to hand combat may be harmful to the public safety, the safety of
police officers, and the safety of the person being arrested or captured. Accordingly, it
shall be deemed reasonable for officers to use that type and degree of other than
deadly force necessary to bring a subject who the officer intends to arrest or capture
quickly under control.
c)Use of physical force shall be discontinued when resistance ceases or when the incident
is under control.
d)Physical force shall not be used against individuals in restraints, except as objectively
reasonable to prevent their escape or prevent imminent bodily injury to the individual,
the officer, or another person. In these situations, only the amount of force necessary
to control the situation shall be used.
e)Once the scene is safe and as soon as practical, an officer shall provide appropriate
medical care consistent with his or her training to any individual who has visible injuries,
complains of being injured, or requests medical attention. This may include providing
first aid, requesting emergency medical services, and/or arranging for transportation to
an emergency medical facility.
f)An officer using deadly or other than deadly force shall prepare a Resistance Response
Report, in addition to all other reports concerning the matter, except when involved in a
Critical Incident as defined by Chapter 19, Critical Incident Policy.
g)Required reports shall be completed by officers before the end of their shift unless a
reasonable delay is approved by a supervisor. Supervisors shall review all incidents
involving the use of force with all officers involved and submit the supervisor's
evaluation as to whether the officer's actions complied with the provisions of this
section.
2)Duty to Intercede
Regardless of tenure or rank, an officer must intercede when:
a)Present and observing another officer using force in violation of section 609.066,
subdivision 2, or otherwise beyond that which is objectively reasonable under the
circumstances; and
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 30
5
Rev 111220
b)Physically or verbally able to do so
3)Duty to Report
An officer who observes another officer use force that exceeds the degree of force permitted by
law has the duty to report the incident in writing within 24 hours to the chief law enforcement
officer of the agency that employs the reporting officer. St. Louis Park Personnel Manual Section
13.2 states that there will be no retaliation as a result of brining a claim forth or cooperating in
an investigation.
4)De-escalation:
a)An officer shall use de-escalation techniques and other alternatives to higher levels of
force consistent with their training whenever possible and appropriate before resorting
to force and to reduce the need for force.
b)Whenever possible and when such delay will not compromise the safety of another or
the officer and will not result in the destruction of evidence, escape of a suspect, or
commission of a crime, an officer shall allow an individual time and opportunity to
submit to verbal commands before force is used.
5)Use of Other Than Deadly Force
When de-escalation techniques are not effective or appropriate, an officer may consider the use
of other than deadly force to control a non-compliant or actively resistant individual. An officer
is authorized to use agency-approved other than deadly force techniques and issued equipment
in the following circumstances:
a)Effecting a lawful arrest; or
b)The execution of legal process; or
c)Enforcing an order of the court; or
d)Executing any other duty imposed upon the public officer by law; or
e)Defense of self or another.
6)Use of Certain Types of Force
a)Except in cases where deadly force is authorized as articulated in MN STAT. 609.066 to
protect the peace officer or another from death or great bodily harm, officers are
prohibited from using:
i)Chokeholds,
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 31
6
Rev 111220
ii)Tying all of a person’s limbs together behind a person’s back to render the
person immobile, or;
iii)Securing a person in any way that results in transporting the person face
down in a vehicle.
b)Less than lethal measures must be considered by the officer prior to applying these
measures.
7)Use of Deadly Force
a)An officer is authorized to use deadly force if an objectively reasonable officer would
believe, based on the totality of the circumstances known to the officer at the time and
without the benefit of hindsight, that such force is necessary. Use of deadly force is
justified when one or both of the following apply;
i)To protect the peace officer or another from death or great bodily harm,
provided that the threat:
(1)can be articulated with specificity by the law enforcement officer;
(2)is reasonably likely to occur absent action by the law enforcement
officer; and
(3)must be addressed through the use of deadly force without
unreasonable delay; or
ii)To effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the
peace officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or
attempted to commit a felony and the officer reasonably believes that the
person will cause death or great bodily harm to another person under the
threat criteria in paragraph (i), items (1) to (3), unless immediately
apprehended.
b)An officer shall not use deadly force against a person based on the danger the person
poses to self if an objectively reasonable officer would believe, based on the totality of
the circumstances known to the officer at the time and without the benefit of hindsight,
that the person does not pose a threat of death or great bodily harm to the peace
officer or to another under the threat criteria in paragraph 7)(a)(i), items (1) to (3).
c)Where feasible, the officer shall identify themselves as a law enforcement officer and
warn of his or her intent to use deadly force.
8)Training
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 32
7
Rev 111220
a)All officers shall receive training, at least annually, on this agency’s use of force policy
and related legal updates.
b)In addition, training shall be provided on a regular and periodic basis and designed to
i)Provide techniques for the use of and reinforce the importance of de-
escalation
ii)Simulate actual shooting situations and conditions
iii)Enhance officers’ discretion and judgement in using other than deadly force
in accordance with this policy
iv)Comply with MN §626.8469 POST Learning Objectives related to:
a.Implicit Bias
b.Crisis Response
c.Conflict Management
d.Cultural Diversity
e.Autism Awareness
c)Before being authorized to carry a firearm all officers shall receive training and
instruction with regard to the proper use of deadly force and to the agency’s policies
and State statutes with regard to such force. Such training and instruction shall
continue on an annual basis.
d)Before carrying an authorized device all officers shall receive training and instruction in
the use of the device including training as it relates to its use in deadly force and/or
other than deadly force situations. Such training and instruction shall continue on an
annual basis.
e)Officers will carry and use only authorized devices unless circumstances exist which
pose an immediate threat to the safety of the public or the officer requiring the use of
a device or object that has not been authorized to counter such a threat.
f)No officer shall modify, alter, or cause to be altered an approved weapon in their
possession or control. This provision shall not be construed to prohibit officers from
modifying grips on approved firearms in the officer's possession or control.
g)Warrior-style training that dehumanizes people, encourages aggressive conduct by
officers, deemphasizes the value of human life or constitutional rights and thereby
increases an officer’s likeliness to use deadly force shall not be authorized or provided.
9)Recordkeeping Requirements
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 33
8
Rev 111220
The chief law enforcement officer shall maintain records of the agency’s compliance with use of
force training requirements.
6.2.0 CONTACT WEAPONS:
1)The purpose of using a contact weapon is to defend against, or control, a subject. Contact
weapons shall be used only where efforts involving the use of less force have failed, or where it
reasonably appears that such methods would be ineffective if attempted. When contact
weapons are being used to control or defend against a subject, officers should continually
reassess whether de-escalation to a lower level of force is feasible. Once it reasonably appears
that lower levels of force would be sufficient to meet any continuing needs for defense or
control, officers should deescalate to that lower level of force.
Contact weapons may be used only in the following manner:
a.Defense: To ward off blows or kicks from another person.
b.Defense or Control: To strike another for the purpose of rendering that person
temporarily incapacitated.
c.Control: To restrain persons
d.Control: In appropriate crowd control situations, to direct and control the movement of
people or persons, or as a barricade.
2)Officers striking another person with a contact weapon should attempt to avoid striking, if
possible, bodily areas likely to result in serious injuries or death unless deadly force is authorized
under this section.
3)Officers striking another person with a contact weapon should attempt to strike, if possible,
bodily areas likely to result only in incapacitation.
4)Complete Resistance Response Report for any use of force involving a contact weapon.
6.3.0 HANDHELD CHEMICAL AEROSOL: PURPOSE
1)The purpose of using chemical aerosol is to render a person temporarily incapacitated so as to
neutralize a threat by, or effect control of, the subject. The use of chemical aerosol shall be
governed by the provisions governing other than deadly force. Only chemical aerosol that are
approved devices, as previously defined, shall be used. The purpose of using a chemical aerosol
is to defend against, or control, a subject. Chemical aerosols shall be used only where efforts
involving the use of less force have failed, or where it reasonably appears that such methods
would be ineffective if attempted. When chemical aerosols are being used to control or defend
against a subject, officers should continually reassess whether de-escalation to a lower level of
force is feasible. Once it reasonably appears that lower levels of force would be sufficient to
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 34
9
Rev 111220
meet any continuing needs for defense or control, officers should deescalate to that lower level
of force.
2)Officers shall exercise due care to ensure that only intended persons are sprayed or otherwise
subject to the application of chemical agents. Use of chemical aerosol must be documented in
the police report and Resistance Response Report.
3)First aid or medical attention shall be provided to all persons sprayed with chemical aerosols.
6.3.1 HANDHELD CHEMICAL AEROSOL: USE
Always discharge the container by holding it in the upright position. This will ensure that the irritant and
not the propelling gas are projected. The maximum effective range of chemical aerosol is fifteen feet.
1)Officers should use a short one to two second burst when spraying chemical aerosol at a person.
After using chemical aerosol, officers shall ensure that the following steps are observed:
a)Keep the contaminated area exposed to fresh air, thus allowing the irritants to escape.
Do not bandage.
b)If the subject is wearing contact lenses at the time of exposure, they must be removed
to achieve proper first aid.
c)First aid measures should be given as soon as possible after the exposure, and in no case
should a period of more than thirty minutes lapse between the exposure and first aid.
d)Immediate medical attention will be provided to any person upon whom the chemical is
applied.
2)If the container is damaged, malfunctions, or if the supply is depleted, a new canister will be
issued. If an officer loses their chemical aerosol, an offense report including the details of the
loss is required.
6.3.2 NOTIFICATION WHEN USED:
Important: In all cases where a chemical aerosol is used, include in police report the following:
1)The time the chemical aerosol was applied.
2)Justification for doing so (e.g., resisting arrest, etc.).
3)The type and time of first aid given.
4)Complete a Resistance Response Report for any use of force involving handheld chemical aerosol.
6.3.3 CAUTIONS IN USING:
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 35
10
Rev 111220
1)Only under conditions that represent an immediate threat of serious injury or death should the
spray be applied into the face at a distance of less than two feet.
2)Under no circumstances is the chemical agent to be applied as a punitive measure.
3)Chemical aerosol should not be discharged in the immediate vicinity of infants.
6.3.4 CHEMICAL MUNITIONS PROCEDURES AND USE:
1)It is the policy of the department to use chemical munitions only in those instances where its
use will provide an effective enforcement tool without creating an unreasonable risk of injury to
subjects or innocent third parties.
2)It is important to use enough chemical aerosol to accomplish the task encountered, but it is
equally important to avoid excessive or indiscriminate use.
3)Any innocent person(s) nearby should be warned of the potential use of chemical munitions and
steps should be taken to minimize possible discomfort or danger to them or property.
4)When chemical munitions are issued, it is imperative that ALL unused munitions be returned to
the armory or other appropriate / designated location as soon as possible.
5)Chemical munitions will not be used until authority has been granted by a supervisor.
6)When chemical munitions are to be used, gas masks will be issued to all on scene personnel.
7)Only liquid (non-burning) chemical munitions will be used inside an enclosed structure unless
otherwise approved by the Chief of Police or designee.
8)Whenever pyrotechnic chemical munitions are used in a closed structure the fire department
will be notified and requested to stand by for possible fire and decontamination.
9)Whenever chemical munitions are used a full report of the circumstances surrounding its use
will be made by the duty supervisor
6.4.0 PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTED ELECTRICAL WEAPON (CEW) USE (i.e., Taser):
PURPOSE: To establish procedures regarding the use, reporting, and first aid treatment when deploying
the CEW.
6.4.1 USE OF CONDUCTED ELECTRICAL WEAPON (CEW):
1)It is the policy of the department to use only that level of force that reasonably appears
necessary to control, or otherwise subdue, violent or potentially violent individuals. Use of the
CEW is authorized under Minnesota State Statute § 609.06, "Authorized Use of Force", as well
as the guidelines set forth in this section.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 36
11
Rev 111220
2)The CEW is a less lethal device that should be deployed as an additional law enforcement tool
that reduces the likelihood of injury to officers and subjects. It should be used to control and /
or apprehend combative subjects when deadly force is not justified or when attempts to subdue
a subject by verbalization or hard, empty hand control has been, or is likely to be, ineffective, or
when an officer has a reasonable expectation that it will be unsafe to approach within contact
range of a given subject.
3)Use of the CEW will be reported on a departmental Resistance Response Report and in the
report of the incident.
6.4.2 PROCEDURES FOR USE:
1)Authorized Users:
The CEW will only be issued to, and deployed by, officers who have completed the department
CEW course for operators.
2)CEW Readiness:
a)The device will be carried in an approved holster on the support side of the body.
Officers not in uniform must carry the device consistent with department training.
b)Only a fully charged and properly functioning CEW shall be carried in the field. It is each
operator's responsibility to check the CEW prior to each duty shift.
c)Officers authorized to use the device shall be issued a minimum of one spare cartridge
as a backup in the event of cartridge failure, the need for redeployment, or in the event
the first cartridge's leads break during engagement. The spare cartridges shall be stored
and carried in a manner consistent with training, and the cartridges replaced consistent
with the manufacturer's expiration requirements.
3)Prohibited Use:
The CEW will not be used in the following manner:
a)As an interrogative device, either through application or threat thereof.
b)To threaten, harass, taunt, or abuse,
c)In areas where there are concentrations of combustible materials.
d)On a handcuffed prisoner.
e)On a subject that has been sprayed with a chemical aerosol.
f)In any environment where the subject's fall could reasonably result in death (such as in
a swimming pool or on an elevated structure).
g)In an unlawful manner.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 37
12
Rev 111220
NOTE: The CEW is extremely effective in incapacitating a subject. However, it should not be
used as a substitute for a firearm. In situations where subjects are armed with a lethal, non-
firearm weapon (e.g., knife, blunt instrument) the CEW operator should be covered by an armed
officer).
4) Deployment:
a) The operator should take into consideration and avoid using the CEW if the subject is
known to be pregnant, very young, very old, frail, or if the officer has reason to believe
that the subject has heart problems or a debilitating illness.
b) The operator will not have both their duty weapon unholstered and ready in one hand,
while simultaneously deploying the CEW in the other hand. This is intended to avoid
unintentionally firing the wrong weapon.
c) Only one CEW will be deployed on one subject at a given time. If there are multiple
subjects involved, then a corresponding number of CEWs may be used.
d) Once an operator has decided the criteria exist for deployment of the CEW, the
following steps shall be adhered to:
1. Operators will not target the head, neck, or groin area of the subject. Each CEW
unit is laser sighted and should be targeted at lower center mass when possible.
2. Prior to the deployment of the CEW the deploying operator, if possible, will
advise other officers and the suspect of the impending deployment by
announcing their intentions. This will be done so the sound of the deploying
CEW unit is not confused with that of a discharging firearm.
3. CEW are programmed to expose a subject to a five second electrical current. It
is recommended that each use should be a full five seconds. Operators have the
discretion of terminating the exposure by turning the CEW off. Operators are to
use this discretion as the circumstances of each incident warrant.
4. No more than three consecutive cycles shall be administered to a subject during
an incident.
5. The device may also be used in certain circumstances in a touch stun mode.
After the barbs have been deployed, create a second contact point of six inches
or more. It is important to note that when the device is used in this manner, it
is:
a. Minimally effective when compared to conventional cartridge type
deployments
b. More likely to leave marks on the subject's skin
c. Subject to the same deployment (use) guidelines and restrictions as
that of the cartridge deployments
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 38
13
Rev 111220
6. After deploying the CEW, operators will notify the duty supervisor, if not at the
scene, as soon as it is safe to do so. If possible, the duty supervisor should
immediately respond to the scene.
7. After the subject has been handcuffed, officers will guard against positional
asphyxiation.
6.4.3 AFTERCARE AND REPORTING:
1)Officers are to immediately call paramedics to the scene to evaluate the subject.
2)If the probes of the CEW unit penetrate the skin of the subject, they may be removed by an
officer. If an officer feels uncomfortable removing the probes, paramedics may assist. If the
head, neck, or groin areas are struck with one or both of the probes, the officer will not attempt
to remove the probes.
3)After the probes are removed from a subject, the following procedure will be adhered to:
a)Probes will be considered a biohazard. Officers will invert spent probes back into the air
cartridge to prevent sharp ends from being exposed. Tape will be placed over the
portals to secure them in the cartridge. The air cartridge wires will then be wound
around the cartridge and secured by tape. The entire cartridge is to be placed in the
proper biohazard container marked as such. Officers will collect several AFID tags and
place them with the air cartridge. The container will be placed in property inventory.
b)Photographs will be taken of probe penetration sites and any injuries incurred during
the incident. Photographs will be placed in property inventory.
c)The subject shall be transported to Methodist Hospital emergency room for evaluation,
using the hospital's CEW exposure protocol.
d)Officers shall detail the CEW deployment in the operator's narrative report prior to the
end of their duty shift.
e)After an exposure has been delivered to a subject, the unit shall be given to the duty
supervisor, who will route it to the Chief of Police's designee. Data from the incident will
be uploaded from the CEW and the unit may be placed back into service.
f)Complete a Resistance Response Report for any use of force involving the Conducted
Energy Weapon.
6.5.0 PROCEDURES WHEN FIREARM IS DISCHARGED:
1)Whenever an officer discharges a firearm in the course and scope of their duties or while acting
under color of law (exclusive of training), the officer shall notify the duty supervisor.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 39
14
Rev 111220
2) The officer who discharged a firearm shall file a written report of the incident with the duty
supervisor as soon as time and circumstances permit, but in no event later than the completion
of their current tour of duty. This requirement may be suspended on order of the immediate
supervisor.
3) If the officer is incapable of filing the required report, the officer's duty supervisor shall be
responsible for filing the report.
4) Consistent with Minnesota State Statute § 626.553, the Commissioner of Public Safety will be
notified in writing of the facts and circumstances surrounding any discharge of a firearm by a
peace officer in the course of duty, other than for training purposes or euthanizing animals.
6.5.1 INITIAL INVESTIGATION OF FIREARM DISCHARGE:
1) Each discharge of a firearm within this policy shall be investigated by the Chief of Police or
designee, who shall personally inspect the scene of the incident.
2) The Chief of Police or designee will determine if an outside agency is needed to investigate and,
if so, determine the appropriate agency.
3) After conducting a thorough investigation of the circumstances surrounding the discharge of the
firearm, the responsible party or agency shall submit a detailed written report of the results of
the investigation to the Chief of Police. The report will state whether the discharge was justified
and in accordance with department policy.
6.5.2 AUTHORIZED FIREARMS:
1) Officers will only carry department owned weapons as their primary firearm, except with
approval by the Chief of Police.
a) The primary duty handgun for Patrol and School Resource Officers (SROs) will be a Glock
17 or 21 (or other firearm if carried before 1-1-19 and approved by the Chief of Police).
b) The primary duty handgun for Investigators, Investigations Sergeants, Drug Task Force
Officer(s), Community Outreach Officer(s), and the Administrative Sergeant will be a
Glock 17, 19 or 21 (or other firearm if carried before 1-1-19 and approved by
the Chief of Police).
c) The primary duty handgun for Command Staff members will be a Glock 17, 19 or 21 (or
other firearm if carried before 1-1-19 and approved by the Chief of Police).
2) Officers are permitted to carry personal firearms off-duty of any make and must complete a
yearly qualification overseen by department firearms instructor.
a) Authorized off-duty firearms can be chambered in .380, 9mm, .40, and .45 caliber.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 40
15
Rev 111220
b)Firearms for off-duty use shall be registered with the Department by make, model, and
serial number.
3)Specialized weapons, as authorized by the Chief of Police.
a)Officers must receive training and be certified as proficient in the use of any specialized
weapons. These specialized weapons include, but are not limited to: shotguns, sniper
rifles, gas launchers, semi-automatic rifles, etc.
4)All Department-owned firearms shall be inspected annually by a qualified Department armorer.
5)Officers shall demonstrate their ability to use their firearms in a safe and proficient manner
during regular firearms qualification sessions.
6)SWAT members working in a special assignment (Investigations, SRO, Community Outreach,
etc.) will maintain their assigned long gun in the armory and will have it ready for use.
6.5.3 AUTHORIZED AMMUNITION:
Only department issued ammunition is authorized.
6.5.4 CARRYING AND DISPLAYING OF FIREARMS:
Officers shall not remove firearms from holsters or cases except when necessary in the performance of
official duty.
1)Cross draw, upside down, or similar holsters are not permitted without the express permission
of the Chief of Police.
2)Officers in civilian dress can wear their firearm concealed or unconcealed. If the firearm is in
public view, their badge must be displayed next to the firearm.
6.5.5 FIREARMS TRAINING:
Training programs will be held at regular intervals, as determined by the Chief of Police or designee for
the purpose of maintaining and improving proficiency in the use of the various types of firearms used by
the department and in order to familiarize officers with the contents of departmental policies governing
the use of deadly force and firearms. All sworn personnel are required to attend the training sessions as
scheduled. Officers failing to attend these sessions without properly being excused by the Chief of Police
or Chief’s designee will be subject to disciplinary action.
6.5.6 USE OF FIREARMS TO EUTHANIZE ANIMALS:
When an animal is critically injured, the owner's permission should be obtained prior to euthanizing the
animal. If the owner is not available, the names and addresses of witnesses shall be obtained to assist in
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 41
16
Rev 111220
verifying that the animal was critically injured. If the owner is present, it is their responsibility to have
the animal removed.
The following guidelines are provided:
1)The animal shall be removed from public view prior to euthanizing whenever possible.
2)The animal should be placed upon the ground (in lieu of pavement) to decrease the possibility of
ricochet.
3)Shoot the animal from close range, five to fifteen feet maximum if possible.
4)Shoot down into the animal so that the projectile, if exiting the animal's body, will enter the
ground.
5)Shoot the animal in the brain to minimize suffering (exception below). Upon euthanizing an
animal, arrangements should be made without delay for removal of the animal's body.
EXCEPTION: If the possibility of rabies exists, or if the animal has bitten someone, the animal cannot be
shot in the brain. In these cases, the animal should be shot in the chest cavity, directly behind either
front leg, and the animal's body must be removed to an appropriate rabies testing facility and the state
department of health notified.
6.5.7 WARNING SHOTS:
Warning shots shall not be fired.
6.6.0 THREATENING THE USE OF FORCE:
An officer may announce to another their intention to use only that type and degree of force that is
reasonably necessary under the circumstances. This provision shall not be construed to authorize or
endorse the use of discourteous, abusive, or unprofessional language.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 3)
Title: Police use of force policy work group update Page 42
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 23, 2020
Written report: 4
Executive summary
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
Recommended action: Review staff’s development team recommendation for the SWLRT
Wooddale Avenue Station site .
Policy consideration: Does the EDA wish to invite the recommended development team for the
SWLRT Wooddale Ave nue Station site to a future study session to discuss their proposal?
Summary: In August 2020, a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the SWLRT Wooddale Ave nue Station
site (located at the northeast corner of 36th Street and Wooddale Ave nue ) was distributed to the
Twin Cities development community. Seven development teams ultimately submitted proposals.
A summary of each proposal can be found in the Discussion section of this report and a more
detailed Metrics of Redevelopment Proposals is attached. A team of seven staff members and a
representative from Ehlers (the EDA’s financial advisor) evaluated and scored the proposals based
on the criteria listed in the RFP. The development teams with the two top scoring proposals were
then asked to present their proposed projects to staff . Following the development teams’
presentations, staff unanimously determined that Saturday Properties/Anderson Companies’
proposal most closely aligned with the city’s vision, strategic priorities, development objectives
and preferred programming for the site. As such, staff is recommending that co-developers
Saturday Properties and Anderson Companies be selected as the development team to redevelop
the SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site. Saturday Properties and Anderson Companies are both
St. Louis Park -based companies with an established track record of successful urban/suburban
mixed -use, mixed-income, TOD projects including affordable housing, and have the financial
capacity to develop a project of the scale envisioned by the EDA .
Financial or budget considerations: The Saturday Properties/Anderson Companies team
offered $3 million for the EDA -owned property. Implementation of the proposed TOD plans for
the SWLRT Wooddale Ave nue Station site will likely require some amount of TIF assistance, yet
to be determined.
Strategic priority consideration:
St. Louis Park is committed to:
-providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-oriented development;
-continue to lead in environmental stewardship;
-providing a wide variety of options for people to make their way around the city
comfortably, safely, and reliably ;
-being a leader in racial equity and inclusion to create a more just and inclusive community
for all;
-creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Summary metrics of redevelopment proposals
Saturday Properties’ Wooddale Station redevelopment proposal
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, economic development coordinator; Jennifer Monson, senior planner
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager, EDA executive director
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
Discussion
Property description and background: The Southwest LRT Wooddale Avenue Station Site (5950
36th St . W.) is located at the northeast corner of 36th Street West and Wooddale Avenue South
in the Elmwood neighborhood. The 1.68-acre site consists of a single property owned by the
city’s Economic Development Authority (EDA) which abuts the planned SWLRT Wooddale
Station platform to the north. The site is currently occupied by a vacant 16,700 square foot
commercial build ing and an excess municipal parking lot. Vehicle access is provided along
Yosemite Avenue and 36th Street West, while bike and pedestrian access is provided along 36th
Street West, Wooddale Avenue South and via the adjacent Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail. There
is also a Metro Transit bus stop on the property along 36th Street.
I mmediately adjacent to the Station Site to the east is a 1.4-acre parcel owned by Standal
Properties. It is occupied by a one-story, multi-tenant commercial building and parking lot.
SWLRT Wooddale Ave nue Station Site and adjacent property
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 3
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
At the Feb. 10, 2020 study session, the EDA reviewed and discussed proposed redevelopment
objectives for the SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station Site to be included in a Request For
Proposals (RFP). Based upon feedback provided by the EDA at the study session, the
Redevelopment Objectives for the Station Site were revised and presented in a July 27, 2020
study session staff report along with the proposed developer selection process. The revised
Redevelopment Objectives for the Station Site listed in the RFP w ere as follows :
The SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station Site is envisioned to be an active, vibrant and connected
place where people can affordably live, work and recreate with the opportunities and
advantages of proximity to LRT. The site is expected to become an important community hub
for mixed -income housing, neighborhood business and transit. Accordingly, the EDA seeks
proposals that include :
•An abundance of affordable multifamily housing that exceeds the city’s Inclusionary
Housing Policy requirements and facilitates multicultural and intergenerational living
(i.e. includes larger size units);
•Smaller scale, affordable, ground floor commercial spaces conducive for neighborhood
businesses;
•Attractive, bold and creative architecture;
•Building and site designs that incorporate numerous “green” elements including
renewable energy sources designed to achieve net zero carbon emissions at the site and
serve as a showcase for environmental sustainability;
•Numerous accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and automobiles,
including electric bikes, electric vehicles , and possibly car sharing;
•A public plaza or community space with unique community landmark or feature;
•High quality site amenities and public art;
•Connections to nature through green features such as enhanced landscaping, green
roofs or living wall systems.
Proposed projects were also encouraged to seamlessly integrate with the adjacent SWLRT
Wooddale Avenue Station and connect to the surrounding Elmwood neighborhood.
Summary of redevelopment proposals: On August 5, 2020, a Request for Proposals (RFP) for
the SWLRT Wooddale Ave nue Station Site was distributed to the Twin Cities development
community. Seven area development teams ultimately submitted proposals which are
summarized below.
Aeon (Minneapolis) proposed two, six -story buildings on the EDA property with central green
space and walkway from the LRT corridor to a center courtyard. Each building had 73 units for a
total of 146 apartments (density of 89 units per acre) all of which would be affordable to
households between 30 percent and 60 percent AMI. The western building would feature 4,250
square feet of flexible commercial space at the corner of 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue
which would result in an unspecified amount of employment. Total estimated construction cost
of the development was $44.5 million ($304,922 per unit). The developer offered to purchase
the EDA property for $1.5 million ($10,000 per unit).
Crowe Companies (St. Paul) proposed a single building with six and seven story massings on the
EDA property with sizable roof top amenities, a small landscaped courtyard and pollinator park
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 4
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
adjacent to the transit station. The building included 205 multifamily housing units (density of
122 units per acre), (including rowhomes along the north and south sides), of which 21 units or
10 percent would be affordable to households at 50 percent AMI. Approximately 8,220 square
feet of commercial space was included on the western side of the building adjacent to the
transit station and along Wooddale Avenue along with amenity spaces on the upper floors. The
building featured numerous sustainable components and features including a 200kw roof top
solar panel array. It was estimated that the development would result in approximately 40
property management and commercial business positions. The e stimated construction cost of
the development was $52.9 million ($258,000 per unit). The developer offered to purchase the
EDA property for $2.5 million ($12,195 per unit).
Saturday Properties/Anderson Companies (St. Louis Park) proposed a six story, 86-unit mixed -
use, mixed-income building on the EDA property and a six story, 197-unit mixed-use, mixed-
income building on the abutting Standal property. With a total of 283 units the project’s density
was 92 units per acre. Both buildings would be mixed income with a total of 57 units, or 20
percent, restricted to affordable rent levels. Specifically, 29 units (10 percent) would be
affordable to households at 50 percent AMI and 28 units (10 percent) would be affordable to
households at 60 percent AMI. The development included 16,100 square feet of commercial
space wrapping around the west side of the west building with spaces across from the transit
station, along Wooddale Avenue as well as along 36th Street. There was also another 1,090
square feet of commercial space and 1,800 square feet of community/co -working space in the
east building along 36th Street. The development included a 25,000 square foot public plaza
adjacent to the transit station designed to accommodate public gatherings and social events as
well as two to p floor amenity spaces overlooking the station area. It was estimated that the
development would result in approximately 49 property management and commercial business
positions. The estimated total development cost of the project was $83.5 million ($295,000 per
unit). The developer offered to purchase both properties for $3 million each ($21,201 per unit).
Schafer Richardson (Minneapolis) proposed a six story, u-shaped building on the EDA property
with a total of 164 residential units and 6,400 square fee t of commercial space along the west
side of the building. All residential units were affordable to households at 60 percent AMI. The
development included a public plaza along Wooddale Avenue adjacent to the station and a
courtyard for residents. It was estimated that the development would result in approximately
10 property management and commercial business positions. The estimated construction cost
of the development was $43.6 million ($266,000 per unit). The developer offered to purchase
the EDA property for $1.6 million ($10,000 per unit).
Solhem (Minneapolis) proposed a five story, u-shaped building on the EDA property with a total
of 178 residential units (density of 106 units per acre) of which 23 units (13 percent) would be
affordable to households at 50 percent AMI. The development featured a separate 1,842
square foot retail building across from the station platform with other retail and service spaces
across from the transit station, along Wooddale Avenue as well as along 36th Street. The
development included ground floor walk-up units, a small public plaza next to the retail building
along Wooddale Avenue , rain gardens across from the station area and a private courtyard
featuring a garden and patio for residents. It was estimated that the development would result
in approximately 22 property management and commercial business positions. The estimated
construction cost of the development was $42 million ($236,000 per unit). The developer
offered to purchase the EDA property for $3.6 million ($20,225 per unit).
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 5
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
United Properties (Minneapolis) proposed a five story, T-shaped building on the EDA property
with a total of 89 residential units (density of 50 units per acre) of which 27 units (30 percent)
would be affordable to households at 50 percent AMI. The development featured 5,000 square
feet square feet of commercial space along 36th Street, another 4,200 square feet of
commercial flex space along 36th Street as well as an 1,800 square foot community room. The
development included a generous public plaza along 36th Street and a smaller private courtyard
for residents on the building’s north side. The development’s estimated employment was
unspecified depending on how the commercial spaces were utilized. The estimated
construction cost of the development was up to $26 million ($292,000 per unit). The developer
offered to purchase the EDA property for $1.5 million ($10,000 per unit).
Wellington Management (Minneapolis) proposed two buildings on the EDA property with a
total of 223,286 square feet and 225 apartment units (density of 134 units per acre). All the
residential units would be affordable to households at 30 to 50 percent AMI . The building on
the west side would be six stories with 75 apartment units and 2,050 square feet of commercial
along 36th Street. The eastern building would be five stories with 150 apartment units with a
3,358 square foot residential lobby. The development included a generous public plaza
between the two buildings which provided a pedestrian access from 36th Street to the station.
The development’s estimated employment was unspecified. The estimated construction cost of
the development was $55 million ($244,318 per unit). The developer offered to purchase the
EDA property for $2.5 million ($11,111 per unit).
Proposal evaluation and selection: A team of seven staff members and a representative from
Ehlers (the EDA’s financial advisor) evaluated the proposals in a systematic manner according to
the following criteria outlined in the RFP.
I.Site and building plans: Degree to which proposal meets or exceeds city’s TOD vision,
development objectives, and the goals of previous planning studies; integrates with
the station area, pedestrian and neighborhood connections; and exhibits site
synergies as well as creative and efficient design (up to 16 points).
II.Project program: Proposed housing and commercial components, square footages,
bedroom mix as well as n umber of affordable housing units and their respective
affordability levels above city requirements (up to 16 points).
III.Economic impact: Proposed property purchase price, estimated taxable market value
of completed project, hiring of BIPOC contractors and workers, and project’s overall
employment potential (up to 12 points).
IV.Community be nefits: Connectivity of proposed project to the surrounding area;
quality of public spaces, including gathering areas/plazas, green space, landscaping,
public art (up to 12 points).
V.Racial equity and inclusion: How the proposed development advances one of the
city’s key Strategic Priorities of Racial Equity and Inclusion in order to create a more
just and inclusive community for all (i.e., through outreach to historically underserved
communities , the hiring of BIPOC contractors/workers, provision of affordable
housing, inclusion of creative housing types/features, through commercial spaces,
public spaces, planned social events, building management and policies, etc.)
(up to 16 points).
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 6
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
VI.Sustainability: Inclusion of green building elements that meet and exceed city
requirements, including on-site energy generation, waste reduction, measures to
reduce trip generation and degree to which project meets city’s energy and carbon
neutrality goals (up to 16 points).
VII.Development team: Overall experience of company and project principals with similar
projects and the type of development being proposed; financial and team member
capacity to implement proposal; previous experience of development team working
together; ability of development team to meet regularly with city staff to refine
project plans, positive property management experience (up to 12 points).
The development teams with the two top scoring proposals (Saturday Prope rties and Solhem )
were then asked to present their proposed projects to the staff team and answer questions.
Following the se developer interview s, staff unanimously selected the Saturday
Properties /Anderson Companies’ proposal as being the most closely aligned with the city’s
vision, strategic priorities, development objectives and preferred programming for the Site.
Below is a summary of how the Saturday Properties/Anderson Companies’ proposal meets the
city’s Strategic Priorities.
•St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to
create a more just and inclusive community for all.
The development team has an established track record of racial equity and inclusion as
evidenced in the diverse team. Forty -six percent of the Saturday Properties’ team is
comprised of people of color, and equity and inclusion are integral components of their
compan y’s mission. The co -developers committed to recruiting BIPOC and woman-
owned subcontractors in the construction of the project as well as in its property
management and providing opportunities for BIPOC businesses within the commercial
offerings. The team has vowed to work closely with the St. Louis Park community to
design the development’s public spaces in a manner that is open, welcoming and
inclusive to ensure the city’s racial equity goals are met. The team also committed to
creating both resident and community events that are culturally inclusive once the
development is operational.
•St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship.
The proposed development will exceed the city’s Green Building Policy requirements
and will include solar arrays on the buildings’ rooftops. The team plans to conduct a
resource assessment of the site’s climate conditions to inform the buildings’ massing
and orientation to optimiz e their energy efficiency , natural ventilation, daylighting, and
view potential. The team strives to reduce energy consumption by 35 to 50 percent
from a business-as-usual forecast, will participate in Xcel Energy’s Design Assistance
program, and will use energy modeling to inform decisions for envelope, mechanical
and electrical systems . Geothermal heating and cooling will be explored. Occupancy
sensing light controls will be installed in common areas and parking garages. High
efficiency HVAC, Energy Star windows, lighting, and appliances will be used throughout
the development in addition to low flow kitchen and bathroom fixtures. It will also
incorporate an electric vehicle charging station and abundant bike parking. Additionally,
the development provide s open space s, enhanced landscaping, innovative stormwater
systems, green roofs, living walls and fountains . The development team also plans to
explore reuse of gray water on-site.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 7
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
•St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-
oriented development.
The proposal includes the redevelopment of two key properties along 36th Street and
fronting the Wooddale LRT Station: 5950 36th Street (owned by the EDA) and 5802 36th
Street (owned by Standal Properties). By combining these two properties, the
development can take advantage of the entire block’s frontage and topography to
create a more spacious site design that facilitates a truly mixed -use , mixed -income,
transit -oriented development with comfortable and welcoming public spaces. By
spreading the development across both properties, it reduces the density of the block
and creates efficiencies than if both parcels were developed separately. The proposed
development provides a total of 283 multifamily housing units of which 57 would be
restricted to affordable rent levels. Specifically, 29 units (10 percent) will be available to
households at 50 percent area median income and another 28 units (10 percent) will be
available to households at 60 percent area median income. The number of affordable
units proposed is close to that of the recently approved all-affordable Union Park Flats
development; however, the affordable units at the Wooddale Station Site will be fully
integrated with the market rate units. The two, six -story buildings are logically designed
to complement the existing development along 36th Street in scale and massing, with
wide sidewalks, a step -back above the ground floor to reduce the feel of the buildings
on the street, and active street frontages. By locating the buildings along the block’s
outer edges, it makes the interior public spaces feel protected and more comfortable for
public and private gatherings.
The proposal includes almost 17,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space with
frontage on both the Wooddale LRT Station and 36th Street. The city has worked
diligently in recent decades to create a commercial corridor along 36th Street, and this
proposal is consistent with that vision. The commercial space fronting Wooddale Avenue
also provides an opportunity for innovative placemaking, setting this station apart and
making it attractive for visitors , whether traveling by foot, bike, light rail or car.
The development offers a plethora of community space including a 25,000 square foot
plaza facing the LRT station and a community co-working space on 36th Street. The
public plaza provides opportunities for programed events and activities (such as
concerts, movie nights and yoga) for residents and the community throughout the year.
•St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their
way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
The development is designed to be welcoming to invite the neighborhood and trail users
through the project to safely access the LRT. The site plan accommodate s all modes of
transportation and has been designed for people first, with wide sidewalks and
pedestrian connections around and through the site. The de velopment team has set the
buildings further north to accommodate an off-street bike facility on 36th Street, which
will need further exploration with city engineering staff.
The development proposal is fully integrated into the Wooddale LRT Station, and the
developers are proposing a Metro Transit bus stop in front of the development on 36th
Street. Coordination will need to occur with Metro Transit and the Metropolitan Council
SWLRT project office.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Page 8
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site
Additionally, the site has been designed to provide convenient commercial and
residential parking underneath the site, and on portions of the ground floor on the east
side of the site. The commercial parking is accessed from 36th Street, and all residential
parking is accessed from Yosemite Avenue. The vehicular circulation patterns follow the
recommendations from the traffic studies that were completed for a previous
development proposal for this site. Approximately 1.25 parking spaces per unit are
proposed, which is a number staff feels comfortable supporting for this site.
•St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through
community engagement.
The development team has committed to providing a robust public participation process
through the planning stages of the development, including community outreach with
the neighborhood, local businesses and various special interest groups. The y will also
work with the community to provide placemaking opportunities within the site area,
including public art, and will coo rdinate with the community to activate the space s with
community events in the future. Additionally, they will allow neighborhood use of the
community room within the east building.
The Saturday Properties/Anderson Companies proposal assumes acquisition of the adjacent
5802 36th Street West property owned by Standal Properties. Staff contacted the Standal family
to verify their willingness to sell their property as reflected in the Saturday Properties/Anderson
Companies proposal. They confirmed their interest in selling their property and willingness to
enter into sale negotiations with the development team selected by the EDA. With the Standals
looking to sell their property in the near term, it is most efficient to combine both properties
and redevelop the entire 3-acre block at approximately the same time .
Saturday Properties and Anderson Companies are both St. Louis Park -based companies, whose
offices are within walking distance of the site and will be long term owners of the development.
Both firms , along with architect, Cunningham Group, and civil engineer Kimley Horn , have a
history of redeveloping complicated sites and a portfolio of successful urban/suburban mixed-
use, mixed-income, TOD projects . This experience includes the TowerLight mixed-use, TOD
building across the street; the recently completed Nolan Mains mixed-use, mixed -income
redevelopment near 50th & France in Edina; as well as the multi-phase Southsider mixed-use,
mixed -income TOD project in Minneapolis. Saturday Properties currently manages nearly 2,000
multifamily housing units, has sizable affordable housing experience, and has the financial
capacity to develop a project of the scale envisioned by the city. Additionally, th e firms have
experience securing public grants and tax increment financing. In summary, the development
team is proposing a transformative redevelopment for the Elmwood neighborhood and is
“committed to providing a project that the city will view as a model for mixed -use, mixed -
income, transit -oriented development” as well as “a showcase for environmental sustainability.”
Given all the above , staff recommends that Saturday Properties/Anderson Companies be
selected as the development team to redevelop the SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station Site.
Next Steps: Staff recommends that the development team be invited to the December 14, 2020
study session to present their re development proposal to the EDA and answer questions. Following
that discussion, the EDA would be asked if it wishes to partner with the selected development
team and enter into in a preliminary development contract for the site . Consideration of a formal
preliminary development contract with the development team would follow soon thereafter.
Building Total SF &ParkingTODTotal AptUnitAffordable unitsCommercialProject TeamSummarySite RenderingComponent SFElementsUnits & Units per acre Mix& levelsSF & UsesAeon,Flannery Construction2 buildings with central green space and walkway from LRT corridor to center open space5 and 6 storiesBuildings hug 36th Street, Wooddale and LRT corridorArchitecture is dressed up by mural art on buildings and a different 1st floor All parking underground 234,573 sf total 8,250 housing 5,250 sf commercial 3,400 sf community space2,540 sf office46,761 sf parkingUnderground parking and small surface lot all accessed via 36th Street. Above ground parking facing 36th Street accessed via entrance/exit drive really close to the intersection. Does not utilize the northern access drive. Total Parking #: ~146 to 182.5Spaces per unit: 1 to 1.25 per unitCommercial parking ? Underground parking for residential units, pedestrian access through the site, internal courtyard, Small Plaza facing LRT station. Rooftop green space, buildings close to street but parking uses line almost all frontage along 36th Street. The courtyard is for residents and not public use. Minimal commercial fronting 36th Street (mostly parking on 36th Street). Total: 146 unitsPhase 1: 73Phase 2: 73Total per acre: 89.3Studios ‐ 231‐bdrm ‐ 22‐bdrm ‐ 813‐bdrm ‐ 284‐bdrm ‐ 12Total units ‐ 146100% @ 30% ‐ 60% AMI Bldg 14,250 SF "flexible commercial"1,800 SF community space1,270 apt officeBldg 21,600 SF community space1 270 apt officeCrowe Companies, esg architecture, Collaborative Design, Pebl Landscape Arch, Solution Bue, civil Angstrom EnvironmentalAzure1 building at 6 and 7 stories Apartments with row houses on 36th and along rail corridorRoof top amenities with plaza addressing rail corridorSimple architectureUnderground and ground level parking317,520 sf203,544 sf housing8,220 SF commercial10,300 sf community space + lobby88,668 parking1 level underground parking and one level parking at grade with 210 spaces. All vehicular access to the site is provided via a RI/RO only along 36th Street. Wooddale designed for no drop‐offs. Does not utilitize the northern access drive. No pedestrian access through the site, as the building takes up the entire site. Bike storage and maintenance provided on the ground level. Total Parking #210 spacesSpaces per unit~<1 per unitCommercial parking??Building designed to the street with uses lining all street facing and LRT facing facades. No surface parking ‐ all provided in structures. Retail along Wooddale and near the LRT station with a corner plaza near the station. Individual access for residential rowhomes along 36th Street and LRT Station (not at grade with the street). 2nd story balconies to help activate 36th Street. Pollinator garden and nature instalation along northern finger of site. Amenity decks provided on the 3nd floor, facing lrt and 36th Street. Highly transparent ground floor with living wall features. Total: 205 UnitsTotal per acre: 122 Studios ‐ 531‐bdrm ‐ 531‐bdrm w/den ‐ 502‐bdrm ‐ 193‐bdrm ‐ 94‐bdrm ‐ 5Total units ‐ 20521 units (10%) at 50% AMIcould possibly add 10 more units at 30% AMI with city assistance 8,220 SF commercial 6,708 SF service Saturday Properties, Anderson Companies, Cuningham Group, Kimley Horn, civil2 buildings ‐ 1 on EDA property, 1 on Standal propertyWest building along 36th and Wooddale with large open area behind West bldg next to LRT stationEast bldg is backward c‐shaped and open to westSkydecks and rooftop balconiesArticulated building gives classic feelAccess is between bldgs from 36th Street, with 11 surface parking stallsAll other parking is structured404,323 sf205,876 sf housing16,804 SF commercial12,693 sf community space132,618 sf parkingThe entrance drive at 36th Street is moved slightly east, and is a entrance only with the exit to the site via Yosemite/35th Stret. Commercial parking accessed via woonerf, residential parking accessed via secured parking off Yosemite. Limited surface parking and underground parking accessed via woonerf and Yosemite (two woonerf enrances for retail, and two residential entrances on Yosemite). Total Parking #403 spacesResidential (362)Commercial (41)Spaces per unit: 1.27 Spaces per bed: 1.021 per 410 SF Commercial 25,000 SF plaza facing LRT, pedestrian connections through and around the site. Utilize north access drive for exits from the site. Building designed to step back along the street to soften edge. Green roofs and living walls, water fountains. Designed with bicycle and pedestrian access in mind throughout site. Wider setbacks along street frontages. Propose relocating bus stop on 36th Street. Site designed to discourage pedestrian traffic across tracks, but to allow LRT drop offs to occur within the site. Retail opening onto the street and plaza to activate both areas, several areas for public art. Two skydecks, and large amenity spaces Total: 283 unitsWest: 86 unitsEast: 197 unitsTotal per acre: 92.5Studios ‐ 48Alcove ‐ 711‐bdrm ‐ 1052‐bdrm ‐ 973‐bdrm ‐ 344‐bdrm ‐ 0 Total units ‐ 283, 57 (or 20%) affordable29 units (10%) at 50% AMI28 units (10%) at 60% AMI57 (20%) total affordable units 16,804 SF retail 12,693 sf community/co‐working space Schafer Richardson, Brodd, UrbanWorks7 story u‐shaped building open to rail corridorlarge triangular plaza along WooddaleCourtyard open to rail corridorSimple, classic architectureAll structured parking248,870 sf229,570 sf housing6,400 sf commercial4,548 sf community space45,170 sf parkingMaintains a RI only off 36th Street and utilizes the Yosemite driveway as the primary entrance to the parking. Some at grade short term parking within the building, majority of parking is below ground. Wooddale designed to discourage dropoffs. Total Parking #109 spacesResidential (89)Commercial (20)Spaces per unit: 0.55 per unit1 per 320 SF CommercialSite designed with a public plaza along Wooddale and LRT, and a more private/public courtyard in the center of the building. Building is placed along 36th Street, and retains the existing access point on 36th. Covered courtyard entrance along 36th Street, and a pedestrian walkway along the east side of the building. Some at grade parking located within the building. Commercial is facing a portion of 36th Street, all of Wooddale, and some facing LRT. Some ground level walk‐up units within the center plaza. Total: 164 unitsTotal per acre: 97.6Studios ‐ 131‐bdrm 1 bath ‐ 562‐bdrm 2 bath ‐ 613‐bdrm 2 bath ‐ 344‐bdrm ‐ 0Total units ‐ 164 100% @ 60 % AMI 6,400 SF general commercial, demised or one large spaceSolheim,BKV Group, Martha Dayton Design, Pierce Pini & Associates, Urban Anthology5 story u‐shaped bulidngopen plaza and separate retail bldg along WooddaleArticulation and balconies add interest to large buildingUnderground parking with all access from Yosemite248,870 sf116,713 sf housing1,842 sf retail1,620 coworking and event space6,621 ‐ live work3,975 ‐ amenity spaceCompletely removed access via 36th Street and fully utlizes the Yosemite access drive. Showing a pedestrian crossing on Wooddale (not at intersection) and creates a large pedestrian area adjacent to the LRT station. Good pedestrian access near the corner of the site. Wooddale not designed to discourage dropoffs. Portion of the ground floor of the residential building is for parking. Total Parking # ??Spaces per unit: ~1Commercial ??Site is designed with a 1‐story, 1,842 SF retail building on the corner of Wooddale and 36th Street with highly transparent facades. Both buildings are placed near the street, with space for wide sidewalks and plazas. Walkup units aong 36th Street, and some commercial on the west corner. The courtyard is entirely private. Minimal surface parking. 8 Live‐work walk up lofts. More traditional style architecture. Total: 178 unitsTotal per acre: 106 Studios ‐ 601‐bdrm ‐ 552‐bdrm ‐ 402 & 3‐bdrm live/work units ‐8(only 163 units noted)Total units 17823 (13%) @ 50% AMI Market rate units designed as affordable @ average of 73% AMI 1,842 SF in separate retail bldg within public plaza and 1,620 SF co‐working and event spaceUnited Properties, LHB, Mobilize Design Architecture5‐storiesT‐shaped building giving open space along 36th Street and along the rail corridorDriveway on east side with angled parkingparking is underground with 17 surface parking on east side116,581 sf 111,581 sf housing5,000 sf retailThe site is primariliy accessed from Yosemite Avenue to the underground garage, and utilizes a right out only movement onto 36th Street, with the same curb cut that exists today. Wooddale and 36th Street are designed to discourage dropoffs, and large boulevards are provided between the sidewalk and the curb. Small surface parking lot, but majority of parking is below ground. Total Parking # 7457 below grade17 surfaceSpaces per unit (0.64 per unit)The building is designed like a T with a large plaza facing 36th Street and the LRT Station. Commercial uses line 36th Street and commercial flex uses line the plaza space. There is a pedestrian path on the building's west side, separate from the sidewalk. The site has been designed with ample landscaping, and space to have large trees. The commercial space on 36th Street is raised from the sidewalk, but allows for outdoor patio space sperate from the pedestrian area. Highly transparent ground floor and lots of opportunities for public art and placemaking. Location for future marketsTotal: 89Total per acre: 50Studios ‐ 221‐bdrm ‐ 452‐bdrm ‐22 Total units ‐ 89, 27 (or 30%) affordable to households @ or below 50% AMI 5,000 SF general commercial Wellington Management2 bldgs that form a V from 36th Street4 and 5 storiesparking on 2 levels below ground and 12 spaces on 1st floor (covered)223,286 sf5,000 sf retailUtilize existing curbcut into the development. Northern drive is used for residential parking access. Plaza through the middle of the site with pedestrian connections. Active placemaking plaza with art and easy pedestrian connection to LRT station. Total Parking # 224Residential: 210Commercial: 12Spaces per unit: (0.93 per unit)Two separate buildings connected by underground parking. 1.5 levels of underground parking. 6 story building on the corner with 5 stories adjacent to existing commercial buildings. Buildings close to the street, high ground floor transparency, but some on‐grade parking facing 36th Street (minimal). Small in scale, open feeling corner even through the building is at the corner. rooftop amenities. Scale smaller and "lighter" since you can see through the site from 36th Street to the LRT StationTotal: 225Total per acre: 134Studios ‐ 491‐bdrm ‐ 1502‐bdrm ‐ 193‐bdrm ‐ 74‐bdrm ‐ 0 Total units ‐225 , 100% affordable to households at 30% to 50% AMI Approximately 2,000 SF retail Traffic and Site CirculationStudy session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station sitePage 9
PropertyEst Market Estimated Requested Public/outdoorRacial EquitySustainable DevelopmentSimilarFinancialTeam Project TeamPurchase Value Employment Public Assistancespaces& InclusionComponentsTeamProjectsCapacityExperienceAeon,Flannery Construction$1,500,000 $10,000 /unit $44.5M construction ($304.9K/unit), $27M tax value of $185K/unit 100 construction positions, unspecified property management and retail positionsNot specifiedTriangular green space between buildingsGreen roof for urban farmingPlaza from LRT corridor to central spaceProvide affordable housing that is safe, stable. Provided examples of working with visual artists and 4RM+ULA and Beacon Interfaith Housing. Geared toward families with larger bedroom counts. Solar panels, green roof, focus on building envelope (Structural Insulated Panels), efficient HVAC & low flow plumbing fixtures, individual utility meters in each unitAeon. Flannery‐construction, 4rM + ULA architectAeon ‐ The Louis, The Rose, Flannery‐ Nova SP, BROWNstone, Villa Del Sol & 4RM + ULA = Great River Landing, Aeon ‐30 years experience, submitted financial stmts & letters of support from Samsara Foundation, Bridgewater Bank, Salo, Old National BankAeon & Flannery worked on several multifamily projects together, Flannery has worked with 4mula on 3 other projectsCrowe Companies, esg architecture, Collaborative Design, Pebl Landscape Arch, Solution Bue, civil Angstrom Environmental$2,500,000 $12,195 /unit $52.9M construction ($258K/unit) Approx 60 construction and 40 property management and retail positions Not specifiedPlaza at Wooddale and rail corridorPollinator park along rail corridorNorth garden plazaRooftop pollinator gardensNot specified. Lower living costs. Small local business focus200 KW solar panel, living walls, passive housing principles, post‐COVID designs, all ‐electric units, path to live net‐zeroCROWE, ESG, Collaborative Deisgn, Pebl, Solution BLue, Angstrom EnvironmentalCROWE‐The Quentin, ESG‐Millennium, E & G, Arcataletters of intent from Bridgewater & Bremer BanksTeam‐the Quentin, CROWE & ESG‐4Marq, CROWE, Solution Blue & Collaborative Design several mixed use multifamily projectsSaturday Properties, Anderson Companies, Kimley Horn, civil$3,000,000 for EDA property, $3,000,000 for adjacent $21,053 /unit $83,520,000 construction, ($295K/unit), $66,630,000 mkt value $235K/unit125 construction, 40 retail, 9 property management positions$13.1M in TIF $46K/unit or $15.7% of TDC, $2,780,000 in cleanup and TOD grants25,000 SF open area north of west bldg adjacent to station area with lawn area and walkwaysEast building has first floor community/co‐working space facing 36th Street and 2nd story amenity space with poolSaturday Properties has a diverse team. Commited to hiring women and BIPOC‐owned subcontractors. Significant public outreach to various community groups. Roof top solar arrays, strive to reduce energy consumpiton by 35‐50%, enhanced landscaping, green roofs, living wall, water fountains, , EV charging station, abundant bike parking. Saturday Properties, Anderson Companies, Cunningham Group & Kimly Horn ‐ strong team with considerable experience & portfolio of successful urban/suburban mixed‐use, mixed‐income, TOD projects. Anderson & Saturday are SLP‐based companiesSaturday ‐ Nolan Mains, Southsider, Cunningham ‐Ivy Station‐CA, Parallel Apts‐Co, KImly‐The Interchange at Target Fields Station, Anderson‐Lowa 46, Hamline Station Apts Saturday Properties has portfolio of successful multifamily projects & manages nearly 2,000 multifamily housing units. Anderson and Saturday Properties long term property owners.Team members have worked together on various mixed use/mixed income TOD projects. Initial Saturday/Anderson co‐developmentSchafer Richardson, Brodd, UrbanWorks$1,650,000 $10,061 /unit $43,666,000 $266K/unit220 construction, 3‐4 property maintenance, 5+ commercial positions25 years of TIFLarge triangular area along Wooddale that would be open to publicCourtyard open to rail corridorAppears to be minimal in private amenitiesTrack record of ensuring POCI and women businesses and contractors. Several diverse subcontractors. solar ready, ‐exploring roof‐top solar, Bike storage, EVC, indoor ventiliation improvements, green cleaningSchafer Richardson‐2,000+ units, 842 units under development, Brodd‐2 decades redevelopment experience, Urban Works‐1,700 units affordable in 14 yearsThe Redwell, Nova SP, Timber & Tie, Viridium, Irvine Exchange, Shafer has invested over $400 million in Twin Cities MarketSchafer, Brodd & Urban Works have worked together on all the like projects in some capacitySolheim,BKV Group, Martha Dayton Design, Pierce Pini & Associates, Urban Anthology$500,000 $2,809 /unit, revised to $3,600,000 $20,225/unit $42M construction, $236K/unitApprox 22 FTE property management and retail positions Notes $650K in est environmental cleanup costs. Unspecified TIF request for infrastructure and housing affordabilityPublic plaza along WooddaleRain gardens in courtyard along rail corridorPrivate courtyard garden/patio on 2nd floor open to rail corridor26% BIPOC employes, 40% female owned subcontractors, actively works to mentor and promote BIPOC and women, employees & direct subs share ownership in developments70 kWh rooftop solar garden=20% elect use, EV charging, organics recycling, design standards consistent with LEED Solhem‐11 years operation, 488 units under construction, +2,000 constructed BKV= 41 years, 200+ projects (over 100 affordable)Solhem=Borealis, Archive, 7West, Solhem BKV=L &H Station, Preserve at SHady Oak, Union Flats, The Penfield, 4800 Excelsior, The Flats at West End Cash offer for purchase, use same bank on construction loan as previous projects?United Properties, LHB, Mobilize Design Architecture$950,000 $10,674 /unit $23‐26M construction, $292K/unitUnspecifiedNot specifiedAlong 36th Street and near LRT stationBIPOC hiring goals in general contractor, BIPOC representation for programming and public art partners. MDA is a BIPOC owned business (MBE)aim for design to meet LEED Silver, SB2030, EVC, carbon smart materialsUP privately held since 1916 (now the Pohlad Family), LHB 1966 with 260 staff ‐sustainable designs, MDA=minority business, The Nordic, The Venue, Target FieldWell established, 100 year old real estate compnay backed by Pohlad familyUP & LHB = The Venue, Nordic & Stable, Gateway Towers UP, MDA & LHB = Upper Harbor TerminalWellington Management$2,500,000 $11,111 /unit $55M TDC $244K/unit, $47.5M estimated market value $210K/unit427 construction positions, unspecified property management and retail positions$6,500,000 TIF $28,889/unit or 12% of TDC $1,500,000 cleanup & TOD grantsLarge V‐shaped public plaza with grassy areas and walkways plus an art walkConnects from 36th Street north through site to rail corridorWMI ‐ 71% of their retail spaces leased to small and/or minority businesses. Lots of work for racial equitysolar array east bldg, pollinator art walk, green roofs, rainwater catchment sys, ed signage, EVCroofWellington Management (WMI) & Collage Architect currently has 3 MX projects under constructionBlue Line Flats, Lake Street Staiton, Metro Lofts, the PITCH, Midtown Corrner, Frogtown Crossroads ‐ all on LRT linesWMI in business for 35+ yrs & has portfolio of over $500 millionWMI business since 1984...developer & property manager, has worked with Collage Arch on dozens of projectsStudy session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4) Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station sitePage 10
3CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
October 9, 2020
City of Saint Louis Park
Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
5005 Minnetonka Blvd.
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
952 924 2197
ghunt@stlouispark.org
Re: Redevelopment Proposal for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station Site
Mr. Hunt,
We are pleased to provide this response to the City of St. Louis Park’s request for proposals to reimagine the area to the
south of the Wooddale LRT Station. Our team began this by focusing on the ways people will access the LRT platform,
and by creating aspects that add placemaking and vibrancy to this area. The redevelopment team is a joint venture led
by Anderson Companies and Saturday Properties. Both companies are based in St. Louis Park in the Historic Walker-
Lake District, and the principals of both firms have a history of redeveloping in St. Louis Park on complicated sites. In
addition to the development experience, Anderson’s role as the general contractor and Saturday’s role as property
manager ensure the redevelopment being proposed is feasible, buildable and can operate as proposed.
Below is a summary of the key components of the Wooddale Station Redevelopment:
1.283 new rental apartments, with 20% of the apartments restricted to affordable rent levels
2.16,800 square feet of new retail space which opens to both 36th, Wooddale, and the plaza
3.Creation of a public plaza adjacent to the Wooddale Station
4.Sustainability and energy reduction measures throughout the area
5.Numerous connection points to the station through the site for pedestrians and bicyclists
6.Circulation and drop off/pick up area for vehicles and ride-sharing
7.An extensive public outreach program prior to finalizing plans and programming
8.$3.5 million in revenue for the City of Saint Louis Park over the life of the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district
As stated earlier, Anderson Companies and Saturday Properties are local companies and our roles as contractor and
property manager ensures that the long-term quality and operation of this redevelopment is being handled by the team
that is presenting this submittal. As a contractor, we have completed developments of similar scale and complexity. As
a property manager, we manage a range of rental housing options from luxury to affordable. As a developer, we have
been very successful in redeveloping sites that involve numerous sources of public financing in locations that will impact
neighboring residents and businesses. As a long-term holder, we are committed to provide a project that the City of
Saint Louis Park will view as a model for mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development.
We look forward to meeting with the City of Saint Louis Park staff, elected officials and city consultants as a means of
further introduction and our vision for this redevelopment. Our contact information is listed below, please do not hesitate
to reach out with any questions.
Thank you for your consideration,
Brent Rogers Greg Anderson
Owner Owner
Saturday Properties Anderson Companies
612 419 6680 952 746 1465
brogers@saturdayproperties.com ganderson@andersoncompanies.us
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 11
7CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Exhibit A
Team
Local Presence
Saturday Properties and Anderson Companies will be working together to co-develop the Wooddale RFP site. Both
companies have a strong commitment to the area with their company headquarters located just blocks away from the
redevelopment site. Employees work, live and play in Saint Louis Park and are dedicated to seeing this corridor prosper.
Below is a list of our involvement in the neighborhood and Saint Louis Park:
•Saturday Properties is headquartered at 3546 Dakota Avenue South, ½ a mile from the Wooddale site.
•Anderson Companies is headquartered at 3340 Republic Avenue, 1 mile from the Wooddale site, and
has been there for more than 21 years.
•Both offices are located in the historic Walker Lake district.
•Verge apartments is a 192 unit building at 3601 Park Center Boulevard, managed by Saturday Properties
and only ½ a mile from the Wooddale site.
•Brent Rogers participated as a developer representative on the Saint Louis Park Form Based Zoning
Code steering committee for the future light rail stations, including the Wooddale Station.
•Brent Rogers is a partner in and was instrumental in the development of Towerlight Senior Housing
located across 36th Street from this RFP site.
•Anderson Companies redeveloped the Reilly Tar Superfund site, which is now home to Davita Dialysis
and Twin Cities Periodontics
•Shawn Meschke with Anderson Companies was the Senior Project Manager for the renovation of the
Historic Brookside School in Saint Louis Park. As the developer and contractor, Shawn and his team
converted the abandoned school into for-sale condominiums
The co-developers, architect, and consultants are committed to this project and the neighborhood. We have been
working closing from project inception and will be a cohesive team all the way through construction. Saturday’s role as
property manager, and ownerships long-term investment strategy, insures our commitment to the neighborhood.
Anderson Companies HQ Saturday Properties HQ Wooddale RFP Site
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 12
8 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
CO–DEVELOPER
SATURDAY PROPERTIES
Brent Rogers & Mark Laverty
CONTRACTOR
ANDERSON COMPANIES
Greg Anderson & Shawn Meschke
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
SATURDAY PROPERTIES
Brent Rogers & Jaime Perron
CIVIL ENGINEER
KIMLEY HORN & ASOCIATES
Trisha Sieh
CO–DEVELOPER
ANDERSON COMPANIES
Greg Anderson
ARCHITECTURE
CUNINGHAM GROUP
Jeff Schoeneck & David Stahl
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 13
11CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Pivot Apartments
Saint Paul, Minnesota
Benedictine Living Community of
Shakopee, Minnesota
Lowa46
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Westwood Community Church
Excelsior, Minnesota
Parallel Apartments
Denver, Colorado
The Brickhouse at Lamar Station
Denver, Colorado
Madison Mixed Use
Madison, Wisconsin
Nolan Mains
Edina, Minnesota
Team Experience Working Together
Our selected team members were selected for their depth of experience working together as a cohesive team. Selected
project experience of this team working together in the last five years is demonstrated below.
Exhibit A
Team
Legend = Firm Experience
Saturday Properties Anderson Companies Cuningham Group Kimley Horn
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 14
12 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
SATURDAY was formed around the philosophy that the most successful
properties incorporate a creative approach to project design, operations,
staffing and marketing from the very start of the process.
Developers at heart, we manage each property with that same attention to
detail and critical eye. They are constantly pushing the boundaries of the
industry to provide an exceptional resident experience and increase the value
of our buildings.
The Saturday development process begins with an underutilized building
or site in neighborhoods that are on the move. Their development team
collaborates to create a unique concept that will both fit into the surroundings
as well as enhance the neighborhood experience.
They approach the development process in a unique, holistic fashion that
brings the same attention to detail and focus throughout the entire process
from site selection, project design, construction management, project launch
and asset management. They are data-driven and draw on both previous
experience and market knowledge in order make objective decisions at each
stage of development. The result of this process is a project that enhances its
community, creates value for partners and investors, provides a new place to
live and do business, as well as outperform the competitive set.
Projects Under Management
Project # of Units Location Retail
Nolan Mains 100 50th and France, Edina, Minnesota 34,000 SF
Lime 171 Lyn-lake, Minneapolis, Minnesota 6,400 SF
Blue 242 Lyn-lake, Minneapolis, Minnesota 11,800 SF
Pivot Apartments 137 Midway, Saint Paul, Minnesota
Southsider 123 Lake & Hiawatha LRT Station
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Verge 192 Wolfe Park, St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Chamberlain 316 East Edge, Richfield, Minnesota
Hello 172 Golden Valley, Minnesota
Rex26 87 Minneapolis, Minnesota
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 15
14 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
EXPERIENCE THE ANDERSON ADVANTAGE
In this world, we’re taught you can’t have it all, but at Anderson Companies,
we’re design-builders. We are trained to find a way to give you what you
need and what you want: design, schedule and budget. Anderson Companies
believes you deserve a construction and development partner that is an
expert in your business: a large national firm with the services and experience
you need. How about a company that also truly values your business? A
partner-organization where the owner not only knows your name, he knows
exactly where your project is at. A place where everyone is responsive,
flexible and dedicated to your satisfaction. That’s the Anderson Advantage:
a team of industry professionals that complements its large-company
experience and market knowledge with hard work, agility, responsiveness and
just great customer service. We have the stability and expertise to take you
where you need to go, and the personal investment to ensure you’ll enjoy the
journey getting there.
EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE
When you have the right team, success takes care of itself. Our team boasts
more than 500 years of construction and development experience on
projects ranging from 100-square-foot tenant improvements to 275-acre
mixed-use community developments. Our team has deep market expertise
in your project type and broad experience in multiple construction delivery
methods and development. Whether you need a truly turnkey development
design-build solution for your corporate headquarters relocation or someone
to oversee the upgrade of your manufacturing facility, our team delivers the
highest standards of quality through a disciplined, collaborative and field-
tested project approach.
TRUST
Every project is an opportunity to achieve a vision, solve a problem, contribute
to a community, and we take that responsibility seriously. Our owner Greg
Anderson is always accessible, checking in on projects, meeting with clients
and mentoring employees. He stands behind your project, ensuring your
project team not only delivers on your project goals, but innovates solutions
that address your facility’s long-term lifecycle costs, energy efficiency,
operating performance and technological adaptability.
At Anderson Companies, you can have it all: a successful and enjoyable
project experience, a facility you will love now and 10 years from now, and a
trusted construction partner sized just right for you.
CONNECTION TO SAINT LOUIS PARK
Anderson Cos has done business (and maintained their office) in Saint Louis
Park for more than 21 years. We have a strong track record in the area,
including the redevelopment of the Reilly Tar Superfund site which is now
home to Davita Dialysis and Twin Cities Periodontics. Anderson Companies
also developed the adjacent site and relocated its headquarters to 3340
Republic at the intersection of Louisiana and Highway 7. Our employees have
been big users of the Greenway and will be within walking distance of the new
light rail line.
Our purpose is to create a building
experience for our clients that aligns with
their values and culture with an outcome
that achieves their mission and goals.
Our team of professionals passionately
supports this purpose by using their
construction/development expertise to
guide our clients through the complexities
of the building process with integrity,
dedication and candor.
Services: design-build, development and
construction
Market expertise: multi-family/senior
housing, worship, retail, office, healthcare,
industrial/manufacturing, renovation/
restoration
21 years1999
40employees
$85M+revenue
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 16
23CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Nolan MainsNew Luxury Living Development
BEFORE
AFTER
saturdayproperties.com
DETAILS
• 100 luxury apartment residences
• 34k SF new high-street retail
• 10% of apartments affordable at 50%
and 60% AMI
• Public plaza, wernoof, 500 stalls new
public parking
• City of Edina RFP, utilized Tax
Increment Financing, Met Council
& DEED grants, City of Edina
Affordable Housing Foundation funds
• Construction commenced January
2018. Completion scheduled
December 2019
• Total Development Cost:
$78,000,000
nolanmains.com Edina, MN
Exhibit B
Comparable Projects
SEE THE PROJECT HERE
Nolan Mains
New Luxury Living Development
Edina, Minnesota
RELEVANCY
Mixed-Use Sustainability Public Space
nolanmains.com
Public Engagement
BEFORE
AFTER
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 17
24 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
SEE THE PROJECT HERE
DETAILS
L & H Station
New Multi-Phase Residential Development
BEFORE
AFTER
saturdayproperties.com
• 550 units of mixed-income housing
in 4 phases
• New public plaza & home for the
Midtown Farmers Market
• Public Private Partnership with
Hennepin County HRA, Met
Council,
City of Minneapolis, & Corcoran
Neighborhood Association
• Phase 1: 123 units completed
December 2018 (Southsider
Apartments)
• Phase 2: 142 units commencing
late 2019 (B Side Apartments)
• Total Development Cost:
$150,000,000
Minneapolis, MNsouthsidermpls.com
PHASE II:142 MICRO APARTMENTSCLOSING - SPRING 2020
PHASE II:40,000 SQ FT PUBLIC PLAZACLOSING - SPRING 2020
PHASE III:113 SENIOR HOUSINGAPARTMENTSCLOSING - SUMMER 2020
PHASE I:HENNEPIN COUNTY OFFICEBUILDING & RETAILOPENED - DEC 2018
PHASE IV:117 MIXED INCOMEAPARTMENTSCLOSING - FALL 2021
PHASE I:123 APARTMENTSOPENED - DEC 2018
DOWNTOWNMINNEAPOLIS(3.4 MILES)
BLUE LINELAKE ST STATION
HWY 55
EXISTING SCHOOL BUILDINGDEMOLITION - APRIL 2019
HENNEPIN COUNTYPARKING LOTS
AIRPORT / MALL OF AMERICA(6.5 MILES)
Southsider Multi-Phase Residential Development
Minneapolis, Minnesota
RELEVANCY
Transit Oriented Design Mixed-Use Sustainability Public Space
southsidermpls.com
BEFORE
AFTER
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 18
33CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Exhibit C
Project Narrative
This Project provides an important opportunity to transform this site to
improve the pedestrian experience in a way that blends into a mixed-use of
retail, residential housing, and public space. The site’s concept is based on
the various documents provided in the RFP and from the City such as the
RFP, 2040 Comprehensive Plan, City’s Vision 3.0 Report, SWLRT Wooddale
Avenue Station Plan, Wooddale Station Area Plan, Corridor Development
Initiative and other documents. We believe the key elements of this Project as
highlighted by the city’s vision, development objectives, and station area plans
are:
A.Cultural and Social Elements
B.Building Design
C.Sustainability & Environmental Stewardship
D.Transit and Mobility
E.Housing Options
F.Equity and Inclusion
A. Culture and Social Elements
•This project includes a 25,000 square foot public plaza built to welcome
transit users to the area from the light-rail stop.
•The plaza will include open space for events, gatherings, or a beautiful
rest stop while waiting for the train, creating a community hub.
•The site is designed to welcome people, no matter how they are getting
to the site and encourages gatherings and social events through the use
of engaging open space and opportunities for public community events
year-round.
•The public plaza will be activated with patio space for the commercial
tenants, water feature, planting beds and large public space that can be
programmed for concerts, movie nights, and yoga.
B. Building Design
•The buildings, plaza, and transit station are well connected through the
careful thought out site plan and designed to highlight the transit station.
•The buildings wrap around the center of the site, creating a central
meeting spot and sense of connection between the varying uses on site
and pedestrian access points.
•The ground floor of both buildings along West 36th Avenue and
Wooddale Avenue will have active uses consisting of retail and apartment
amenities.
•The two buildings are designed to be timeless with attractive architecture
that will draw people’s attention to the site. The buildings are broken
in two to provide a view corridor to the LRT station and public plaza
providing enhanced multi-modal movement and the streetscape. The
buildings gently embrace and protect the public plaza providing a public
realm not often provided in private projects.
•The exterior designs of the buildings are seamlessly integrated with hints
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 19
34 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
of color and contrast between the two.
•The building will be segmented into a base middle and top. The base will
utilize rich authentic materials and pedestrian detail and the building is
crowned by simple pediment that shelters the patios. The building façade
steps back to provide a gentle street edge and provide for a human scale
development that isn’t overwhelming to pedestrians. The fenestrations,
patios and other items will be artfully composed to be a rich attractive
neighbor for years to come.
•The retail parking is located in the same parking garage as the residential
with different entrances that will be clearly marked. All retail parking is
accessed off the woonerf area, while residents have secured parking
access off of Yosemite Avenue South, with limited surface parking.
•The project will invest in quality materials for public amenities for seating
and bike racks, plaza materials such as colored concrete and pavers and
native plantings carefully selected for low water use and the environment.
C. Sustainability & Environmental Stewardship
The Project will act as a showcase for environmental sustainability touch on
not only reducing energy use but addressing shifts occurring in lifestyles,
mobility, flexibility, and embracing connectivity to the community. The Project
will support the LRT and residents will benefit from the proximity to LRT. The
site is designed to be inclusive and invite the neighborhood through the
Project to safely access the LRT and enjoy the public plaza and amenities.
Connections are made to nature through green features such as enhanced
landscaping, green roofs or living wall systems. Great care has been taken
to soften the project edge with pedestrian detail, tree’s and planting’s and
amenities. A tree-scape shelters the pedestrian as they walk around and
through the development. Water fountains provide calming, zen-like sounds
not typically available outside of a natural area.
Green sustainable strategies are listed below:
•Incorporated into the design of the plaza are green elements such as
open green space, native plants and trees.
•Strive to reduce energy consumption by 35 to 50% from a business-as-
usual forecast for residential buildings, per the City’s Climate Action Plan.
•A resource assessment of existing climate conditions around not just the
building site, but the from the adjacent urban fabric that includes wind
flow patterns, shadow studies, temperatures, precipitation, and cloud
cover analysis, which can inform early decisions about building massing
and orientation for optimizing energy efficiency, natural ventilation,
daylighting, and view potential.
•Participate in Xcel Design Assistance (EDA) program.
•Complete Resource Analysis Report – Energy/Daylight/Material/Water.
•Develop an Envelope Optimization Strategy.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 20
35CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
•Energy Modeling – energy analysis and simulations to inform decisions for
envelope and mechanical/electrical systems.
•Investigate financial incentives.
•Building to be “solar ready”.
D. Transit and Mobility
The site was designed around pedestrian and bicycle flow throughout the
site from the transit station, nearby neighborhoods, and the community. With
the station at the center of the design, the plaza, woonerf, retail and housing
are all designed to be an appealing place for walkers and bikers to approach,
spend time, and utilize the station to get around. Care has been taken to
separate pedestrian path from vehicles and making the pedestrian the priority.
Some of these considerations include:
•Limited at grade parking is provided to accommodate short-term parking
required to attract customers to commercial spaces.
•A designated transit user drop-off and pick-up area. Vehicles access
the site from West 36th Avenue in one-way traffic flow to not only ease
traffic along Wooddale Avenue and 36th but improve the overall plaza
experience.
•Residents may access the underground parking both from the plaza as
well as to the east from Yosemite Avenue South. The project can easily
continue to adapt and evolve to housing needs, future transit and next
generations to come.
•Connections to the Cedar Lake Regional Trail will be transparent and easy
to follow for pedestrians and bicyclists.
•Bus route 17 connects to Up Town, Downtown Minneapolis, and Northeast
and will be repositioned towards the entrance to the site off West 36th
Avenue. This allows pedestrians to walk right through the plaza and into
the light-rail area.
•Bike racks will be positioned throughout the plaza and public areas to
provide parking for people coming from the trail, nearby neighborhoods,
or off the light rail.
E. Housing Options
•Mix of affordability with 225 units (80%) at market rate, 29 units (10%) at
60% AMI and 29 units (10%) at 50% AMI.
•All of the units will be dispersed throughout the two buildings with access
to all of the amenities and features the project has to offer.
•Range of unit sizes with a mix of studios, alcoves, one-bedroom, two-
bedroom and three-bedroom units.
•Affordability levels will be split evenly amongst the unit sizes to provide
affordable options for all interested tenants.
•The site will have high-quality amenities consisting of a private amenity
deck with a pool, grills, green space and seating; a fitness center; office/
workspace; and a rooftop deck
Exhibit C
Project Narrative
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 21
36 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
•There will be various unit styles for residents to choose from and secure,
underground parking.
F. Equity and Inclusion
•This project reflects Saint Louis Park’s key strategic priorities of racial
equity and inclusion. The project will be open, welcoming and weaving
all modes of life together – work, live, play.
•The project is a neighborhood-oriented development with spaces for
both public activities, local businesses, and residents to enjoy.
•Will build social capital through community engagement both in the
design process and in the events hosted on site in the public plaza.
•The site has features designed to welcome all pedestrians whether they
come by foot, on bike, from transit, or in a car.
•Will work with local artists on a mural or art piece to be located in the
public plaza.
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 22
39 39Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Exhibit D
Preliminary Site Plan
36 th St.
W
o
o
d
d
a
l
e
A
v
e
.Yosemite Ave.East
Building
West Building
East
Lobby
West
Lobby
Wooddale
Lawn
Resident
Amenity
Deck over
Parking
Ea
s
t
S
k
y
Dec
k
West
Sky DeckDog
Run
LRT Dro
p
Pub
l
ic
Pa
r
k
ing
Retail
Parkin
g
Access
Reta
i
lPar
k
ingAcces
s
Resident
Parking
Entry L1
Possible PV ArrayPossible PV Array
Resident
Parking
Entry L0
Bi
ke
Pa
r
k
ing
Bi
ke
Pa
r
k
ing
Bike Parki
n
g
Bike Parking
Bypass
SWLRT
W
o
o
d
d
al
e
A
v
e. St
ati
o
n
Bus Stop
BNSF
H
e
a
v
y
R
ail
Cedar L
ak
e
Bik
e Tr
ail
Level 0
Resident Parking
below entire
building footprint
241 spaces
N
Level 1
Resident Parking
behind active
Amenity Spaces
and below
amenity deck 121
Spaces
Level 1
Public Parking
12 angled surface
parking and 29
interior spaces
43 total
Grade Level of
West Building
Commercial/Retail
and Resident Lobby
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 23
EntryEnt
ry
20-0430St LouiS Park | M inneS ota 3November 6, 2020Wooddale RFP - Park Central
rEndErEd Floor Plan - ground Floor
COMMUNITY /
COWORKING LOBBY
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 24
43 43Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Exhibit E
Conceptual Images
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 25
44 44Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Corner of 36th and Yosemite
Plaza edge along Station
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 26
45CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Corner of Wooddale and 36th
Overhead of Plaza
Exhibit E
Conceptual Images
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 27
46 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
Movies in the Park
Wooddale Lawn
Plaza Entry off Wooddale Ave
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 28
62 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
Areas of direct community benefit on site consist of:
•A public plaza with areas for community events to be hosted (such
as movies, music in the park, etc.), people to wait for the train, and a
park-like feel for relaxing
•Coordinated programing with the City of Saint Louis Park, the
Elmwood Neighborhood Association and local businesses in the plaza
throughout the year
•Relocating the bus stop along West 36th Street to improve vehicle
flow and pedestrian safety
•Added bike parking in several locations throughout the project site
•Expanded pedestrian sidewalks along West 36th Street and
Wooddale Avenue.
•Site lighting at the pedestrian level
•16,800 square feet of retail space with convenient parking. Users will
be a combination of restaurant, retail, and service providers meeting
the varying needs and desire of the community
•The retail will open up to the street and plaza to help activate the
plaza
•Designated drop-off and pick-up area for light-rail transit users located
on site with one-way traffic for additional safety
•Shared woonerf for pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles through the
site with one-way traffic for enhance safety for pedestrians and
bicyclist
•One-way entrance into the site on W 36th street to ease the flow of
traffic into the site and onto W 36th Street
•Wayfinding signage to direct visitors to the plaza, light-rail platform
and businesses
•Added green space and green elements with native landscaping
surrounding the buildings and throughout the plaza. A water feature is
located near the light rail to provide a calming sense and invite people
to hangout in the area
•The buildings are setback above the ground level to provide
pedestrian-scale development
•A variety of housing options both in unit size and affordability level
•Several areas for public art provided by local artists
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 29
65CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK Park Central
Exhibit J
Sustainable Elements
The project will act as a showcase for environmental sustainability touch on
not only reducing energy use but addressing shifts occurring in lifestyles,
mobility, flexibility and embracing connectivity to the community. The project
will support the LRT and residents will benefit from the proximity to LRT. The
site is designed to be inclusive and invite the neighborhood through the
project to safely access the LRT and enjoy the public plaza and amenities.
Green sustainable strategies are listed below:
•Strive to reduce energy consumption by 35 to 50% from a business-as-
usual forecast for residential buildings, per the City’s Climate Action Plan.•Aresource assessment of existing climate conditions around not just the
building site, but the from the adjacent urban fabric that includes wind flow
patterns, shadow studies, temperatures, precipitation, and cloud cover
analysis, which can inform early decisions about building massing and
orientation for optimizing energy efficiency, natural ventilation, daylighting,
and view potential
•Participate in Xcel Design Assistance (EDA) program
•Complete Resource Analysis Report – Energy/Daylight/Material/Water
•Develop an Envelope Optimization Strategy•Energy Modeling – energy analysis and simulations to inform decisions for
envelope and mechanical/electrical systems.
•Investigate financial incentives
•Solar arrays on building rooftops
•Secure bicycle storage
•Preserving open space by clustering buildings, roadways, and parking
•Electric vehicle charging station
•Save and reuse all site topsoil
•Light-colored paving material with an albedo of 0.30 or greater
•Windows throughout are ENERGY STAR qualified or have a U value
</=0.35 (NFRC label)
•Cool roof
•No use of electric radiant heating
•Variable speed fans, motors, pump and/or blowers
•High efficiency air conditioner or heat pump
•No use of CFC-based refrigerants in building HVAC&R systems.
•Install ENERGY STAR qualified light fixtures•Compact or linear fluorescent or LED lighting in place of incandescent
down lights.•Occupancy/daylighting controls sensors used in common areas and
parking garage areas.
•Low flow kitchen and bathroom plumbing fixtures
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 30
66 Saturday Properties + Anderson Companies
Stormwater
The proposed redevelopment will considerably clean up the stormwater
leaving the Project site. The majority of the exiting site is old impervious
pavement and rooftop which discharges stormwater without any on-site
treatment. The regional stormwater treatment facilities at Hoigaard Village
are a wonderful improvement to the area. In addition to the regional facilities,
this proposed redevelopment will utilize a combination of above-ground and
below-ground stormwater management features to add layer of treatment
and rate-control on-site. More specifically, enhanced stormwater abstraction
via decentralized green infrastructure will leverage the capabilities of soil and
vegetation to infiltrate, redistribute, and store stormwater volume. Trees will
interact with the urban hydrologic cycle by intercepting stormwater runoff,
removing water from the soil via transpiration, enhancing infiltration, and
bolstering the performance of other green infrastructure.
Other sustainable infrastructure ideas include:
•Permeable paver or pavements
•Green roof (or partial green features on roof or amenity deck)
•Geothermal heating & cooling
•Traffic Demand Management techniques to further encourage sustainable
modes of transportation
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 4)
Title: Developer recommendation for SWLRT Wooddale Avenue Station site Page 31
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 23, 2020
Written report: 5
Executive summary
Title: 2020 Census outreach final report
Recommended action: None. Thank you for promoting the census through your individual
networks, newsletters and communications with residents.
Policy consideration: None.
Summary: The 2020 Census data collection concluded on October 15, 2020. The final self -
response rates reported by the Census Bureau were :
67.0% United States
75.1% Minnesota (best in the nation)
79.6% Hennepin County
80.6% St. Louis Park
70.1% to 90.1% Range for individual census tracts in St. Louis Park
14 of 15 of the city’s census tracts matched or improved their final 2010 self -response rates.
The most improved was census tract 223.02 (Aquila neighborhood) which improved 7.8%. The
highest rate was census tract 228.01 (includes Lake Forest and the northern part of the Fern Hill
neighborhoods) at 90.1%. See the attached maps for comparisons and more details.
The U.S. Census Bureau reported total response rates of 99.9% in Hennepin County and
Minnesota. That includes its nonresponse follow-up and quality control efforts.
The city received a $7,000 grant from the National League of Cities Census Rapid Response
Program which deployed more resources to areas with lower predicted and actual response
rates and boost social media messages to historically undercounted communities.
COVID-19 disrupted many planned in -person events and activities intended to promote the
2020 Census. The city shifted its focus to social media, emails, text messaging, various mailings,
a virtual phone bank (which reached more than 12,500 Minnesotans) and communications
through rental property owners and managers. The racial equity and inclusion team include d
census messaging in their outreach to people of color, indigenous and rental communities and
worked with a partner Latinx organization, HACER, to promote the census.
Many thanks to the complete count committee volunteers and the communications, racial
equity and inclusion, housing and planning staff that all helped to achieve these results!
Financial or budget considerations: None. Th is was a budgeted item supplemented by a grant.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity
and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all.
Supporting documents: 2020 census response rate maps by census tract, city , county and state
Prepared by: Sean Walther, planning and zoning supervisor
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 5) Page 2
Title: 2020 Census outreach final report
Self -Response by Census Tract
This map features self-response rates from households that responded to the
2020 Census online, by phone, or by mail.
Source : https://2020census.gov/en/response-rates.html
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 5) Page 3
Title: 2020 Census outreach final report
Self -Response by City
(in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area)
This map features self-response rates from households that responded to the
2020 Cens us online, by phone, or by mail.
Source: https://2020census.gov/en/response-rates.html
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 5) Page 4
Title: 2020 Census outreach final report
Self-Response by County
This map features self-response rates from households that responded to the
2020 Census online, by phone, or by mail.
Source: https://2020census.gov/en/response-rates.html
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 5) Page 5
Title: 2020 Census outreach final report
Self-Response by State
This map features self-response rates from households that responded to the
2020 Census online, by phone, or by mail.
Source: https://2020census.gov/en/response-rates.html
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: November 23, 2020
Written report: 6
Executive summary
Title: October 2020 monthly financial report
Recommended action: No action required at this time.
Policy consideration: Monthly financial reporting is part of our financial management policies.
Summary: The monthly financial report provides an overview of general fund revenues and
departmental expenditures comparing them to budget throughout the year.
Financial or budget considerations: At the end of October, general fund expenditures were at
approximately 76% of the adopted annual budget, which is about 7% under budget. Permit
revenue has exceeded the annual budget in October at 103%.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Summary of revenues and departmental expenditures
Prepared by: Darla Monson, accountant
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, deputy city manager/HR director
Approve d by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 6) Page 2
Title: October 2020 monthly financial report
Discussion
Background: This monthly report provides summary information of the overall level of
revenues and departmental expenditures in the general fund compared to the adopted budget
throughout the year.
Present considerations:
General Fund
Under normal circumstances, expenditures would generally be at about 83% of the annual
budget at the end of October. This year general fund expenditures are running about 7% under
at 76% of the adopted annual budget through October. No departmental expenditures are
exceeding budget. A primary reason for the low er expenditures can be attributed to salary
savings from positions in the general fund that were put on hold due to COVID.
The license and permit revenues combined are now exceeding the total annual budget at 103%
through Octobe r. Net of the refunds that were issued to businesses due to the COVID-19
closures , business and liquor license revenue is at 82% or $789,000 of the annual budget.
Permit revenue is at 109% or $4,032,000 of the total budget and includes the permits for
Parkway Place Apartments, The Quentin and several school district projects. A portion of the 10
West End permit revenue was deferred last year to 2020 to offset related expenditures.
When the November report is prepared, staff will be able to provide information on the early
December property tax settlement from the county. Early indications are that collections will be
strong.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Actual $2,899 $6,184 $8,981 $11,848 $15,420 $18,566 $21,876 $25,191 $28,127 $31,808
Budget $3,475 $6,949 $10,424 $13,898 $17,373 $20,847 $24,322 $27,796 $31,271 $34,745 $38,220 $41,694
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$45,000
$ THOUSANDS Monthly Expenditures -General Fund
Summary of Revenues & Departmental Expenditures - General Fund As of October 31, 2020 20202020201820182019201920202020Balance YTD Budget Budget Audited Budget Audited Budget YTD OctRemaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes25,705,886$ 26,597,928$ 26,880,004$ 26,952,306$ 28,393,728$ 14,988,095$ 13,405,633$ 52.79% Licenses and Permits3,924,648 4,001,644 4,103,424 5,264,659 4,660,811 4,821,515 (160,704) 103.45% Fines & Forfeits269,200 282,146 279,700 274,340 280,000 107,541 172,459 38.41% Intergovernmental1,864,877 2,006,435 1,760,900 1,761,763 1,760,082 1,660,630 99,452 94.35% Charges for Services2,162,410 2,180,589 2,187,319 2,160,345 2,273,824 1,241,592 1,032,233 54.60% Rents & Other Miscellaneous1,318,037 1,427,744 1,367,012 1,500,867 1,456,102 1,031,733 424,369 70.86% Transfers In1,929,090 1,929,076 1,999,877 2,012,706 2,038,338 1,651,949 386,390 81.04% Investment Earnings 160,000 251,494 180,000 523,124 210,000 95,487 114,513 45.47% Other Income40,950 35,802 31,300 57,274 621,280 615,147 6,133 99.01% Use of Fund Balance523,835 298,156 230,026 - 0.00%Total General Fund Revenues37,898,933$ 38,712,858$ 39,087,692$ 40,737,411$ 41,694,165$ 26,213,687$ 15,480,478$ 62.87%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration 1,341,606$ 1,340,282$ 1,837,620$ 1,673,619$ 1,868,599$ 1,153,628$ 714,971$ 61.74% Finance 978,752 964,036 1,034,199 1,078,291 1,124,045 898,455 225,590 79.93% Assessing 759,865 710,715 772,746 751,737 808,171 651,829 156,342 80.65% Human Resources 796,666 735,050 805,620 756,767 823,209 636,407 186,802 77.31% Community Development 1,479,911 1,559,721 1,502,521 1,515,672 1,571,894 1,278,711 293,183 81.35% Facilities Maintenance 1,162,342 1,223,109 1,170,211 1,209,474 1,265,337 1,020,026 245,311 80.61% Information Resources 1,589,432 1,526,028 1,674,937 1,474,604 1,709,255 1,310,260 398,995 76.66% Communications & Marketing 755,940 829,732 805,674 786,448 828,004 622,602 205,402 75.19% Community Outreach 27,637 12,085 0.00%Total General Government8,892,151$ 8,900,758$ 9,603,528$ 9,246,612$ 9,998,514$ 7,571,918$ 2,426,596$ 75.73% Public Safety: Police9,930,681$ 9,877,014$ 10,335,497$ 10,452,038$ 10,853,821$ 8,791,332$ 2,062,489$ 81.00% Fire Protection4,657,973 4,630,520 4,813,078 4,754,524 5,040,703 3,898,483 1,142,220 77.34% Building 2,544,762 2,295,910 2,555,335 2,430,473 2,696,585 1,931,217 765,368 71.62%Total Public Safety17,133,416$ 16,803,444$ 17,703,910$ 17,637,035$ 18,591,109$ 14,621,032$ 3,970,077$ 78.65% Operations: Public Works Administration230,753$ 208,050$ 290,753$ 214,436$ 273,318$ 183,951$ 89,367$ 67.30% Public Works Operations3,091,857 2,998,935 3,111,481 3,099,493 3,331,966 2,490,195 841,771 74.74% Vehicle Maintenance1,253,367 1,210,279 1,242,236 1,268,700 1,278,827 966,294 312,533 75.56% Engineering525,834 552,432 570,377 609,567 551,285 432,512 118,773 78.46%Total Operations5,101,811$ 4,969,696$ 5,214,847$ 5,192,196$ 5,435,396$ 4,072,952$ 1,362,444$ 74.93% Parks and Recreation: Organized Recreation1,582,490 1,499,780 1,579,569 1,498,462 1,637,002 1,192,999 444,003 72.88% Recreation Center1,860,755 2,004,937 1,949,657 2,041,386 2,061,394 1,595,548 465,846 77.40% Park Maintenance1,830,530 1,866,744 1,833,297 1,820,455 1,906,363 1,473,311 433,052 77.28% Westwood Nature Center622,346 599,704 643,750 612,266 748,683 496,887 251,796 66.37% Natural Resources559,662 376,359 484,784 429,409 504,143 349,987 154,156 69.42%Total Parks and Recreation6,455,783$ 6,347,524$ 6,491,057$ 6,401,977$ 6,857,585$ 5,108,733$ 1,748,852$ 74.50% Other Depts and Non-Departmental: Racial Equity and Inclusion -$ -$ -$ 4,592$ 314,077$ 226,711$ 87,366$ 72.18% Sustainability26,283 497,484 206,402 291,082 41.49% Transfers Out1,040,000 300,000 0.00% Contingency and Other315,772 186,966 74,350 121,245 0.00%Total Other Depts and Non-Departmental315,772$ 1,226,966$ 74,350$ 452,119$ 811,561$ 433,113$ 378,448$ 53.37%Total General Fund Expenditures37,898,933$ 38,248,388$ 39,087,692$ 38,929,940$ 41,694,165$ 31,807,747$ 9,886,418$ 76.29%Study session meeting of November 23, 2020 (Item No. 6) Title: October 2020 monthly financial reportPage 3