HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021/05/24 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
MAY 24, 2021
Meetings of the St. Louis Park City Council will be conducted in person starting May 17, 2021.
The city will follow COVID-19 protocols set forth by the Center of Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) and the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). Members of the public may
attend the meeting in person at 5005 Minnetonka Blvd.
Some members of the St. Louis Park City Council will participate in the May 24, 2021 city council
study session by electronic device or telephone rather than by being personally present at the city
council's regular meeting place at 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. Cisco Webex will be used to conduct
videoconference of this meeting. Visit bit.ly/slpccagendas to view the agenda and reports.
Members of the public can monitor the meeting by video and audio at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil
or by calling +1.312.535.8110 and using access code 372 106 61 for audio only.
6:30 p.m. – STUDY SESSION
Discussion items
1. 6:30 p.m. Citywide speed limit evaluation update
2. 7:30 p.m. Semi-trailer truck parking
3. 8:00 p.m. Future study session agenda planning and prioritization
8:05 p.m. Communications/updates (verbal)
8:10 p.m. Adjourn
Written reports
4. Update on SWLRT Community Works PLACES art initiative
5. April 2021 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: Study session
Meeting date: May 24, 2021
Discussion item: 1
Executive summary
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
Recommended action: None at this time. This report is to inform council on the feedback
received and updated staff recommendations for speed limits.
Policy consideration: Does the council wish to implement speed limit changes on city streets at
this time as allowed by state statute?
Summary: In May 2019, provisions passed by the Minnesota legislature gave cities increased
authority to set speed limits. In March 2020, council directed staff to continue to investigate
the feasibility and impacts of changing speed limits within the city. In August 2020, staff
presented a draft speed limit evaluation to council. In January 2021, staff presented an updated
speed limit evaluation to council, including recommendations for implementation.
Starting in April 2021, the city began to inform community members on the recommended
changes to speed limits. Many community members, in response to these communications,
emailed and called staff to provide feedback and ask questions. In response to feedback,
supported by a closer look at the data, staff has updated speed limit recommendations on
Cedar Lake Rd, Louisiana Ave, 36th St, and Utica Ave.
Some council members and many residents provided feedback that speed limit changes should
be accompanied by additional police speed enforcement. Existing research suggests that
physical police enforcement is not a sustainable method to decrease vehicle speeds through an
equity, finance, or resources lens. For these reasons, no additional police staffing, or resources
are recommended around the implementation of new speed limits.
Under the current schedule, if council wishes to move forward with speed limit changes,
implementation can still occur in 2021. If the council requests additional study, public
engagement or other information that requires further study session or regular meeting
discussions, implementation will be pushed to 2022.
Financial or budget considerations: Financial impacts relating to changing speed limits are
currently estimated at $200,000. Costs include new signs, signal timing, and public outreach.
The funding source is general obligation (GO) bonds.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Existing and recommended speed limit maps
Speed limit received feedback
Study session report, Jan. 25, 2021 (pgs. 2 – 42)
Study session report, Aug 24, 2020 (pgs. 2 – 32)
Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director; Mike Harcey, police chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
Discussion
Background: In May 2019, the Minnesota legislature passed a provision that gave cities
authority to set speed limits. They went into effect on Aug. 1, 2019. The full language of this
provision is provided below:
Minnesota Statues, Section 169.14, Subd. 5h. Speed limits on city streets. A city may
establish speed limits for city streets under the city's jurisdiction other than the limits
provided in subdivision 2 without conducting an engineering and traffic investigation.
This subdivision does not apply to town roads, county highways, or trunk highways in
the city. A city that establishes speed limits pursuant to this section must implement
speed limit changes in a consistent and understandable manner. The city must erect
appropriate signs to display the speed limit. A city that uses the authority under this
subdivision must develop procedures to set speed limits based on the city's safety,
engineering, and traffic analysis. At a minimum, the safety, engineering, and traffic
analysis must consider national urban speed limit guidance and studies, local traffic
crashes, and methods to effectively communicate the change to the public.
Staff last updated council at the Jan. 25, 2021 study session (report attached). The update
included the speed limit evaluation report, speed limit recommendations and discussion of next
steps. Staff presented new sections of the evaluation including updated national guidance and
race equity and inclusion (REI). The overall speed recommendation was a category approach
where 20 mph were generally on lower traffic roads, 25 mph on medium traffic roads, and 30+
mph on high traffic roads.
The council generally supported the speed limit recommendations and had questions regarding
specific street segments. It was the consensus of the council that staff should inform the public
of the recommended changes, review council’s comments and bring the subject back for
discussion prior to implementation.
What we’ve heard: Starting in April, the city began a campaign to inform community members
on the recommended changes to speed limits. Staff has been using an “inform” approach from
the International Association for Public Participation’s (IAP2) spectrum of public participation.
With this approach, the goal is to provide the public with information to assist them in
understanding what is being proposed and why.
As a part of these efforts, a postcard was sent to every address in the city (25,000 postcards).
Weekly posts were made to the city’s social media accounts (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and
NextDoor). Email updates were also provided through the city’s GovDelivery. In addition, the
initiative was covered in articles in both the Star Tribune and the Sun Sailor. All the outreach
directed the public to the speed limit webpage which included maps, the evaluation report and
answers to frequently asked questions. It also provided an email address and phone number
for specific questions/ comments.
Many community members, in response to these communications, emailed and called staff to
provide feedback and ask questions. In total, feedback from 81 people were received through
email and phone calls. In addition, comments from 140 people were received through
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
Facebook, Twitter, and Nextdoor. All comments received from these methods are attached to
the report.
To distill the many comments, the following were the most common topics brought forward by
respondents. Note that one email/interaction may have had more than one topic included in it.
So, the totals do not add up to the total interactions discussed above. Common topics were
ones that were mentioned at least six times.
Number of comments received
(as of 5/18/21)
Comment Email/phone Social media TOTAL
I DONT support changing speed limits 29 24 53
We should focus on and have more speed enforcement 15 30 45
I DO support changing speed limits 28 10 38
People drive too fast on my street 22 13 35
We should focus on and have more stop sign enforcement 12 5 17
There is no valid safety issue to address 3 11 14
Recommended changes are government overreach 4 10 14
20 mph is okay on local neighborhood streets 5 8 13
Don't be like Minneapolis or other cities 7 4 11
Speed limits costs too much/waste of money 6 4 10
I feel this is only to raise funds via ticketing 4 4 8
Lower speed limits will make people safer 4 4 8
20 mph is too slow 7 0 7
I will choose to drive/move/shop away from SLP with lower
speed limits 4 3 7
Pedestrians don't walk on the sidewalk 3 3 6
Pedestrians/Cyclists don't follow traffic rules 2 4 6
We should instead focus on street design (vehicle, ped, bike) 0 6 6
In addition to these common topics, we also were provided comments on specific streets.
Nearly all of these were on Cedar Lake Rd and Louisiana Ave. This resulted in staff taking a
closer look at the recommendations provided to council on Jan. 25. Further discussion on this
review is included later in the report.
We also heard the following topics from at least one council member at the Jan 25 council
meeting:
• Wanting lower speed limits around future SWLRT stations
• Enforcement for all road users, including bicycles
• The speed limit of Cedar Lake Rd
• The speed limit of Utica Ave south of 23rd St
• The speed limit of Walker Ave and Lake St through the Historic Walker Lake District
• The speed limit of 36th St between Wooddale Ave and Belt Line Blvd
How feedback has affected speed limit recommendations: As referenced in the statute above,
a city that establishes speed limits must implement speed limit changes in a consistent and
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
understandable manner, taking into consideration national urban speed limit guidance and
studies. In addition, we must develop procedures to set speed limits based on the city's safety,
engineering, and traffic analysis. These are laid out in the speed limit evaluation report.
National guidance indicates that setting a speed limit much lower than what drivers actually
travel leads to drivers not complying with the limit. That works against the goals of increasing
safety and decreasing vehicle speeds. The recommended speed limits should be
understandable, consistent and reasonable.
Staff did an in-depth review of the speed limit changes recommended for the specific street
segments brought up by the public. A summary of the analysis is included below. In all the
following tables, bolded speed limit recommendations have changed since the Jan. 25 study
session.
Cedar Lake Rd
• Existing speed limit: 35 mph from west city boundary to Highway 100. 30 mph from
Highway 100 to east dead end.
• Original recommendation: 25 mph from west city boundary to Zarthan Ave. 35 mph
from Zarthan Ave to Quentin Ave. 20 mph from Quentin Ave to east dead end.
• Revised recommendation: 30 mph from west city boundary to Louisiana Ave. 25 mph
from Louisiana Ave to Zarthan Ave. 30 mph from Zarthan Ave to Quentin Ave. 20 mph
from Quentin Ave to east dead end.
Extents of Cedar
Lake Rd
Average speed Median speed Recommended
speed limit
W city boundary to
Louisiana Ave
30.2 mph 30.5 mph 30 mph
Louisiana Ave to
Zarthan Ave
25.1 mph 25.2 mph 25 mph
Zarthan Ave to
Quentin Ave
34 mph N/A 30 mph
Quentin Ave to east
dead end
22.1 mph 22.4 mph 20 mph
A closer look at data on Cedar Lake Rd showed differing speed conditions along the corridor.
The segment that was narrowed and improved in 2019, Louisiana Ave to Zarthan Ave, had
slower speeds than the rest of the corridor. The segment west of Louisiana Ave, which has not
been reconstructed, more resembles 30 mph conditions. This segment is programmed for
construction in 2024. At that time, the speed limit can be revisited. For these reasons, Cedar
Lake Rd from the west city boundary to Louisiana Ave is recommended at 30 mph.
Near the West End, while the driver speeds are faster, the segment does not meet the criteria
for a 35-mph speed limit. 35 mph streets in our recommendations represent areas that have
limited driver access (little to no intersections or driveways) and limited pedestrian and bicyclist
access. Cedar Lake Rd has dedicated bikeways, sidewalks, and frequent driveways. For these
reasons, Cedar Lake Rd from Zarthan Ave to Quentin Ave is recommended at 30 mph. East of
Quentin Ave more resembles 20 mph conditions.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
Louisiana Ave
• Existing speed limit: 30 mph from north city boundary to Excelsior Blvd.
• Original recommendation: 25 mph from north city boundary to 32nd St. 30 mph from
32nd St to Excelsior Blvd
• Revised recommendation: 30 mph from north city boundary to Excelsior Blvd.
Extents of Louisiana
Ave
Average speed Median speed Recommended
speed limit
North city boundary
to Cedar Lake Rd
28.5 mph 29.8 mph 30 mph
Cedar Lake Rd to
32nd St
29 mph 29.5 mph 30 mph
32nd St to Hwy 7 30.9 mph 31.3 mph 30 mph
Hwy 7 to Excelsior
Blvd
32.3 mph 32.3 mph 30 mph
A closer look at data on Louisiana Avenue showed more consistent driver speeds across the
corridor. Average and median speeds ranged between 28 and 32 mph from the north city
boundary to Excelsior Blvd. Louisiana Ave from the north city boundary to 27th St is scheduled
for reconstruction in 2023. Closer to Hwy 7 at Oxford St, Metro Transit’s Southwest Light Rail
(SWLRT) will begin service in 2024. These changes may change traffic conditions in the area.
The speed limit can be revisited along with any of these changes. For these reasons, Louisiana
Ave in its entirety is recommended at 30 mph.
36th St (Elmwood/Wolfe Park)
• Existing speed limit: 30 mph from Alabama Ave to Beltline Blvd
• Original recommendation: 30 mph from Alabama Ave to Beltline Blvd
• Revised recommendation: 25 mph from Alabama Ave to Beltline Blvd
Extents of 36th St Average speed Median speed Recommended
speed limit
Wooddale to Hwy
100
25.7 mph 26.2 mph 25 mph
Hwy 100 to Beltline
Blvd
31.6 mph 34.4 mph 25 mph
Phase two of the Monterey-Beltline-36th improvements began May 17. The construction
includes 36th St from the Hwy 100 ramps to Beltline Blvd. In the short term, construction site
conditions will cause drivers to travel slower than average. Post-construction, 36th St will
become a three-lane section (two lanes westbound and one lane eastbound). West of Hwy 100,
vehicle speeds more resemble a 25 mph speed limit. In addition, 36th St west of Hwy 100 is
scheduled for reconstruction in 2022. Finally, near Wooddale Avenue, Metro Transit’s SWLRT
will begin service in 2024. Due to these infrastructure changes, staff recommends the speed on
36th Street to be set at 25 mph.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1) Page 6
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
Utica Ave south of Westside Dr
• Existing speed limit: 30 mph from Westside Dr to 27th St
• Original recommendation: 25 mph from Westside Dr to 27th St
• Revised recommendation: 30 mph from Westside Dr to 27th St
A closer look at data on Utica Ave shows an extreme range of observed speeds. Data with
asterisks occurred outside of the evaluation’s study period but are included in this report to
provide more recent counts.
SB data collection
date
Average speed Median speed
2017 – 2019 avg 35.1 mph 35.3 mph
Sept 2018 37.6 mph 38.2 mph
Oct 2018 39.7 mph 39.7 mph
May 2019 28.6 mph 29.4 mph
Aug 2019 40 mph 40.4 mph
May 2020* 45.5 mph* 45.4 mph*
July 2020* 20 mph* 24 mph*
A speed limit higher than 35 mph is not recommended for any city street based on national
guidance. 35 mph streets in our recommendations represent areas that have limited driver
access (little to no intersections or driveways) and limited pedestrian and bicyclist access. This
segment has many driveways and adjacent trail use, so the speed limit should be lower than 35
mph.
In our recommendations, 30 mph streets have four or more drive lanes or at least 12,000
vehicles a day. Utica Ave has about 5,000 vehicles a day and has two total drive lanes. However,
30 mph is also the existing posted speed limit. Utica Ave can be recommended at 30 mph with
an understanding that further infrastructure improvements are necessary to lower it further.
Utica Ave resembles other 25 mph streets in that it has similar traffic volumes, is mostly high-
density residential, and has a multi-use trail. It does not resemble other 25 mph streets because
of its driver speeds. For instance, 36th St by Wooddale Ave (15,000 vehicles a day) has an
average and median speed of 26 mph. 36th St also has adjacent sidewalks, many driveways,
and is entirely mixed-use or high-density residential. Utica Ave was originally recommended at
25 mph in recognition of the higher concentration of people living adjacent and that there are
no alternative routes.
Utica Ave does not resemble a local residential street set with a 20-mph speed limit. Low
volume streets (less than 2,000 vehicles a day) had a median and average speed of 21 mph.
Utica Ave’s existing driving speeds far outpace that number. Part of the main goals of setting
speed limits is for them to be reasonable and contextually appropriate. Drivers will not follow
speed limits that don’t make sense. Because the existing vehicle speeds are so far above 20
mph, Utica Ave is not recommended at 20 mph.
Staff recommends Utica Ave to be set at 30 mph. Two of the four vehicle speed counts are
closer to 25 mph speeds. However, the other two are much higher. It is clear that vehicle
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1) Page 7
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
speeds are higher in this segment than most others in the city. This segment of road is not
scheduled for reconstruction, however, once it is, the speed limit can be reviewed at that time.
Responding to other feedback:
Walker Ave and Lake St (Historic Walker Lake District)
• Existing speed limit: 30 mph from Louisiana Ave to Wooddale Ave
• Original and current recommendation: 25 mph from Louisiana Ave to Wooddale Ave
Street Avg speed Median speed Recommended
speed limit
Walker Ave 27 mph 26.8 mph 25 mph
Lake St 27.5 mph 27.7 mph 25 mph
For the street segments through the Historic Walker Lake district, the previously recommended
speed limit resembles both the average and median speeds. The construction on Lake St west
of Dakota Ave occurred after the traffic data was taken. Even with lower speeds, the Lake St
segment is less than a half mile long. National guidance recommends that speed limits remain
constant for at least half a mile. For these reasons, Walker Ave and Lake St near the Historic
Walker Lake District are recommended at 25 mph.
County roads
Many comments were received regarding county roads within the city’s boundaries (Minnetonka
Blvd, Excelsior Blvd, France Ave south of Excelsior Blvd, and County Rd 25). The 2019 legislation
only allows cities to change speed limits on local streets. This authority was not granted to the
counties and the city cannot change speed limits on streets owned by Hennepin County.
Border or shared roads with other cities
A number of the city’s roads either share or have segments in adjacent cities. Minneapolis
completed its speed limit change implementation in 2020. Edina has made recommendations
but has not yet approved possible changes. Golden Valley conducted a speed limit evaluation
and will not move forward with any changes. Our other neighbors (Plymouth, Hopkins and
Minnetonka) have not discussed speed limits at this time.
With this in mind, if a city has not yet made recommendations, St. Louis Park will leave border
or shared roads untouched. Minneapolis and Edina staff have agreed to St. Louis Park’s
recommendations for their respective shared streets.
Shared streets left unchanged:
• Texas Ave south of Hwy 7 (Hopkins)
• Ford Rd south of Wayzata Blvd (Minnetonka)
• Wayzata Blvd west of Shelard Pkwy (Minnetonka)
• Wayzata Blvd west of 14th St (Golden Valley)
• Quentin Ave north of Cedar Lake Rd (Golden Valley)
• Wayzata Blvd east of Park Place Blvd (Golden Valley)
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1) Page 8
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
Shared streets recommended for new speed limits:
• France Ave from Minnetonka Blvd to north city border – 25 mph (Minneapolis)
• 44th St from Glen Pl to east of Wooddale Ave – 25 mph (Edina)
Enforcement
Currently, speed limits are enforced in St. Louis Park through education, verbal warnings, and
citations. The police department uses movable speed boards that provide immediate feedback
to drivers. The boards warn drivers of their speed and the current speed limit. The police also
use traffic stops that result in education of speed limits, verbal warnings for violations and
citations when appropriate. The city also uses social media advisements of police enforcement
actions.
At times, the police use multi-officer enforcement in a general area. The targeted enforcement
is focused to specific problem locations and time frames during the day. The department also
uses directed patrol of areas that have been identified by community members or by officers as
being problem locations.
Some council members and many residents provided feedback that speed limit changes should
be accompanied by additional police speed enforcement. Existing research suggests that
physical police enforcement is not a sustainable method to decrease vehicle speeds through an
equity, finance, or resources lens. Automated speed enforcement is currently not legal in
Minnesota and not an option at this time. For these reasons, no additional police staffing or
resources are proposed around the implementation of new speed limits.
A study of conspicuous police enforcement on Interstate 96 in Michigan found that police
presence in the highway was effective in reducing average speeds in the surrounding area.
However, upon passing the police car, drivers accelerated back to their original speed or higher.
In addition, there was no overall change in driver behavior 1, 2, or 3 hours after police action.
Meaning, there was not a lasting effect of police presence on vehicle speeds.
A study of inconspicuous police enforcement on Interstate 26 in Asheville, North Carolina found
that drivers slow down more when they are surprised by police’s presence on the roadway. The
study compared enforcement with different “levels of presence” on or adjacent to the
roadway. Police concealed in the median decreased driver speeds by at least 5 mph compared
to a marked car on the side of the road at less than 1 mph. The study did not analyze the lasting
effect of police presence on vehicle speeds.
A study of an aggressive traffic violation enforcement program in Fresno, California found a
decrease in vehicle crashes by over 8 percent (366 crashes). This decrease was achieved by a
330 percent increase in moving violation citations (85,947 total citations), as much as 17% of
Fresno’s population. Speed-related citations and vehicle speed data was not included.
Studies in Lafayette, Louisiana, Detroit, and North Carolina have found that Black drivers are
more likely to receive a speed warning stop, receive a speeding ticket, be arrested for speeding.
A review of police stops in San Diego found that Black drivers were almost 20 percent more
likely to be stopped during daylight hours when their race was more visible. The San Diego
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1) Page 9
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
study also found further disparities in enforcement in the Northeast district where Black drivers
were 60 percent more likely to be stopped.
Effective ways to decrease vehicle speeds are either through implementing infrastructure
changes and/or lowering the existing speed limits. If the council wishes to move forward with
heightened police enforcement, staff does not recommend moving forward with changing
speed limits.
Effectiveness of lowering speed limits alone
In 2018, The City of Boston studied the effects of lowering their overall speed limit from 30 to
25 mph. Average vehicle speeds did not change. However, the proportion of drivers traveling
over 30 mph decreased by 0.5 percent and drivers traveling over 35 mph decreased by 22
percent.
In 2020, Portland, OR studied the effects of lowering their overall speed limit from 25 to 20
mph. Median and 85th percentile speeds did not change. However, the proportion of drivers
traveling over 30 mph decreased by 1.7 percent and drivers traveling over 35 mph decreased by
0.5 percent.
In 2020, Seattle studied the effects of lowering their overall speed limit from 30 to 25 mph.
Median speeds decreased by 2.5 mph (almost 10 percent). 85th percentile speeds decreased by
2.2 mph (7 percent). The proportion of drivers traveling over 40 mph decreased by 54 percent.
Timeline: Under the current schedule, if council wishes to move forward with speed limit
changes, implementation can still occur in 2021. If the council requests additional study,
community engagement or other information that requires further study session discussions,
implementation will be pushed to 2022. The tentative schedule is below:
Study session report/discussion May 24, 2021
1st reading of ordinance June 7
2nd reading of ordinance June 21
Implementation Fall 2021
SHELARDP K WY
LOUISIANAAVESWO
O
D
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
SERVICE DR HIGHW
A
Y
7VIRGINIAAVE STEXASAVESBROOKSIDEAVESAQUILAAVE SF ORESTRD
YOSEMITE AVE SFORD RDDAKOTA AVE SC
EDARWOO D R D
MEADOWBROOK RDMON
T
E
R
E
Y
D
RUTICA AVE SLAKE ST
WFLAG AVE SQUEBEC
A
VE
S
28TH ST WTEXASAVES SERVICE DR HWY 394 S
38TH ST W
26TH ST W
PARKCENTERBLVD3
4
T
H
S
T
WEDGEWOOD AVE S36TH ST W
33RD ST W
QUENTINAVESALABAMA AVE SCAMBRIDGE ST BELTLINEBLVDWOODDALE
AVESERVICE DR HIGHWAY 100 S
CEDAR LA
K
E
R
D
CEDA
R L
A
K
E
R
D
LAKE ST
W
AQUILALNSLOUISIANA AVE S22ND S
T
W
FRANCEAVESR A M PPARK PLACE BLVDOTTAWA AVE SWALKER ST ZARTHAN AVE S37TH S T W
C E D A R L A K E RD
BARRY STBROWNDALE AVE S35 T H ST
W
OXFO
R
D
S
T
16TH ST W
36TH ST W
W
E
S
T
M
O
R
E
L
A
N
D
L
N
WAYZATABLVD
Existing speed limits
0 1 20.5
Miles
Existing speed limit
25 mph
30 mph
35 mph
40 mph
Non-city or private streets
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 10
SHELARD P KWY
LOUISIANAAVESWO
O
D
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
TEXAS AVE SSERVICE DR
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
7VIRGINIAAVE STEXAS AVE SSERVICE DR HIGHWA
Y
7DAKOTA AVE S3 6TH ST W
MEADOWBROOK RDMO
N
T
E
RE
Y
DR28TH ST WTEXASAVES SERVICE DR HWY 394 S
PARKCENTERBLVD37T H STW36TH ST W
44TH ST
WALABAMA AVE SCAMBRIDGE ST BELTLINEBLVDQUENTIN AVE SWOODDALE
AVEAQUILA AV
E
S SERVICE DR HIGHWAY 100 S
CEDAR LA
K
E
R
D
C E D A R L A K E R D
CEDARLAKERD
LAKE ST
W LAKE ST
W
LOUISIANAAVESLOUISIANA AVE SLOUISIANA AVE SFRANCE AVE SFORD RD23RD ST
WPARK PLACE BLVDWALKER ST
SE R V IC EDRHWY169WOXFO
R
D
S
T
16TH ST WFORDRD
36TH ST W
Recommended speed limits 5/19/21
Recommended speed limit
20 mph
25 mph
30 mph
35 mph
Non-city or private street
0 1 20.5
Miles
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 11
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
1
Emailed responses (respondent bolded):
1.And what is needed is some monitoring of Dakota. Multiple times a day, cars are going too fast. Can
we get at least on of those sign that tell you what the speed limit is and what car are active going? -
Amy Mitchell
2.I have lived in St. Louis park on Dakota Ave for 12 years. It great a bike lane has been added. One of
the great things of living on the street is seeing all the kids walking, biking and skateboarding to
school. I have alway been worried about them, cause of the speed of the traffic. Also, people use
Dakota walking to/ from work from the bus stop. And many bike riders, dog walkers etc. Since the
bike lane has been added. I have seen an increase in bike riders. Which is great. A pain for parking
but I believe safer and I support it. Lower speed on Dakota avenue is something that is needed. I
have been worried about the speedy car while people are biking and walking. Thank you for this, it
will make it so much safer. - Amy Mitchell
3.When/how can you get bicyclists to stop at stop signs and yield to pedestrians at intersections?
Solving/enforcing that would make our street far safer then reducing speed limits by 5 mph. – Tom
Johnson
4.In addition to lower some speed limits, I am curious to know what, if anything, will be done
to enforce speed limits, new ones and existing ones?
I live on France Ave. near 39th. I know that this lower speed limit plan doesn’t cover this road and
see that it’s considered "a non-city or private road," however I would like to take this opportunity to
bring it your attention how busy of an intersection it is and how it could benefit from simply
enforcement of speed limits.
I have lived in my house for less than one year. Right after I moved in, I noticed that I heard cars
honking at one another or at pedestrians; or brakes scre eching at that intersection daily – many
times more than once a day. For a while I kept a log.
From the way I see it, four busy routes end up at this intersection
•Traffic is coming to this intersection westbound from Richfield Rd (between Bde Maka
Ska and Lake Harriet)
•Traffic going north on France to Excelsior
•Traffic going south on France to 62
•Traffic headed eastbound on 38th (from Excelsior) turning briefly onto France
southbound, and then turning onto 39th eastbound towards Richfield Rd (between Bde
Maka Ska and Lake Harriet).
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 12
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
2
I think this intersection is busier than the 38th and France — which has a crosswalk and a flashing
light. In addition, there are two bus stops at 39 th and France. (None at 38th and France).
Speaking of the bus stop, my new neighbor literally suggested I ‘jaywalk’ to cross the street if I saw
the bus coming…. Because if I actually went to the intersection that so many cars would be turning
or crossing over, or coming down the hill too quickly that I would miss the bus because I wouldn’t be
able to cross for 5 minutes. I have not had to take the bus to work due to the pandemic, but I have
seen people get off the bus and wait and wait and wait to cross France.
After moving in, I remember telling my family there was bound to be an accident at this
intersection… and one night last year there was. A car flipped on it’s side. I don’t know the
aftermath, if someone was seriously injured or not. But all the neighbors were outside that night
and several I spoke with also said they weren’t surprised with how fast cars drove up and down
France and how many cars turned at that intersection.
People also use it as a walking route to cross from Linden Hills to walk to Minnekahda Park. With
kids. And strollers.
Cars fly down the hill southbound at 40 or 50, easy. I’ve even seen a Police officer fly by – at like
60mph - WITHOUT his sirens/lights on. Going so fast I could tell if it was a Minneapolis, SLP or Edina
officer.
I have only lived here during the pandemic and have worked from home like many people I know in
the area, and I often wonder -- how busy will the intersection be in the future when we are able to
interact safely and go back to work, etc... and there are more people get back on the road again?
I would say a comparable road is Xerxes. France has about 5 stop signs/lights/crosswalks from south
of the lakes to Hwy 62 and I think that Xerxes has maybe 10?
I realize that it’s a main thoroughfare, and that altering the speed limit, installing a stop sign or
flashing light is unlikely as SLP would have to work with the City of Minneapolis and probably
Hennepin county to do any of these things, but I think the speed limit is 30… is there a way to at
least control the speed?
Thanks for listening! It's been on my mind for 9 months, and I never knew who I could tell. :) – Carol
“Tiger” Porter – 3920 France Ave
5.Are you nuts???!*/%&*!! Many cars already drive at least 40 MPH on Oxford Street, Cedar Lake
Road, and Louisiana Ave (south of 32nd). Cedar Lake Road should still be 35. Texas and Louisiana
should still be 30 to match Minnetonka Boulevard’s similar road conditions - (and RAISED to 35 on
Louisiana south of 32nd !, due to a more open road and what drivers naturally do there. That way,
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 13
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
3
people would be driving at more similar speeds.). The frontage road, south of I 394 could also be
raised to 35. I am already tail-gated quite often, by the slow speeds you have now. If I drive the new
proposed speeds, I will be rear-ended several times! Don’t do it! Don’t be like Minneapolis! Don’t
defund the police! Don’t burn the city down! Don’t be like the pod people! – Matt Adams – 1445
Louisiana Ave
6.Yes pls lower the speed limits. Vernon ave cars go by at 40 and up to 50 mph just take a walk and
you will see. I've complained for yrs. Lets also get some enforcement. - Rick Thies
7.A resounding booooo to lower speed limits in SLP, regardless of what other communities are d oing
in the metro, across the country and the world. Enforce current speed limits and controls at
intersections. Do not pass an ordinance you don't intend to enforce! This opinion is widely held! -
Julia Fredrickson
8.Please keep the speed limits at 30mph or higher on the main roads in our city. I get the little
neighborhood streets could be dropped to 25mph, but 20 is TOO SLOW. Cedar Lake Rd, Louisiana
and Texas can easily be safely driven at 35mph. They were built for those speeds. Louisiana is
already ridiculously slow at 30mph. I hear the argument it's safer to go slower, but how many
people have been hit on Louisiana and Cedar Lake Road? It's not the cars that are being dangerous,
but often the cyclists not following the rules of the road. Please don't handicap the majority, for
the minority. Leave the speed limits alone. We are not Minneapolis. - Maja Salmon
9.I suspect that St. Louis Park has already decided to move forward with lower speed limits in its
seeming need to not be outdone by Minneapolis when it comes to knee-jerk solutions.
Nevertheless, I feel compelled to respond. We live on a corner with a 4-way stop (Inglewood & 28th
Street), and since Joppa does not go through at 28th Street, we see our fair share of traffic.
Additionally, we are regular walkers due to having two dogs, and so we have a fairly good sense of
traffic in a residential neighborhood. Since your initial email regarding “Twenty is Plenty”, I have
paid more attention to my own driving and that of other drivers. My conclusion is that sometimes
Twenty is Plenty, but more often than not, twenty is not necessary to maintain safety in a
neighborhood. What is concerning is the number of people going well over thirt y and/or who
regard the stop signs as less than even a yield.
“Twenty is Plenty” is a cute slogan. Kudos to whoever coined it, but if SLP wants to be honest about
addressing safety in neighborhoods, then do something about the egregious driving habits of those
who regularly disregard stop signs in neighborhoods and who drive far in excess of 30 mph. Yes,
that entails more policing, and I recognize that is politically unpopular with some, but take it from
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 14
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
4
this lifelong Democrat, we are all kidding ourselves—and abdicating civic responsibility—when we
allow slogans to be chosen over common sense in a quest to keep up with the Minneapolis Joneses.
-Miriam Gustafson
10.This seems to be a solution in search of a problem. There have been no serious traffic accidents,
much less a rash of such incidents, related to current 30 MPH speed limits in SLP. In fact, other than
the fact that this has spread from over-crowded European cities and has been adopted by
Minneapolis, I really see no justification for this change in SLP. If there are specific problem areas,
those can be dealt with on an individual basis, with signs and speed bumps. There is virtually no
pedestrian crossing traffic in town, except in the Fern Hill neighborhood where people going to
temple refuse to walk on the sidewalks. There has never been any enforcement around this, and
even on these streets, there has been no safety issues. The cost of changing the signs, the cost of
enforcement and the disruption to the normal flow of traffic in and around neig hborhoods are all
solid reasons not to change the speed limit.
According to the website:
“What are the goals of the recommended speed limits?
•To eliminate fatalities and serious injuries that are a result of crashes on city streets. No
history of this happening in SLP. The last fatal traffic accident was when an elderly man
failed to stop for a stop sign while riding his scooter and drove in front of a car going
under 30 miles per hour. Speed had nothing to do with it.
•To create a mobility system that prioritizes walking first, then bicycling and transit, and
then motor vehicle use. SLP is not an urbanized area. It was designed for automobile
travel. There is virtually no way for normal people to walk to a grocery store, a job or
even to school. Nice idea, but not realistic. Bicycling is not a year around option. Transit
is not easy to access for anyone not living in multifamily housing, and even then, it is
hard to get to where you want to go, unless that is downtown Minneapolis.
•To ensure the quality and function of the transportation system contributes to equitable
outcomes for all people. This is nonsense. There is no evidence that slowing traffic to 20
mph will increase equity.
•To support the movement of people and goods. Again, nonsense. Slowing traffic by
definition slows the movement of people and goods.
•To be understandable, consistent, replicable, reasonable and contextually appropriate in
setting speed limits. The current system has been in use and has been understood by
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 15
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
5
drivers in SLP and from other areas of Minnesota for at least 70 years. The new system
will not be understood unless you happen to catch a little sign coming into the city
streets.
•To clearly communicate the new speed limits and to educate about their connection to
safety, especially as people enter the city. Again, unless you are going to put up huge
signs at every entrance to the city, this won’t work.
I am hopeful that this proposal is actually being carefully considered, but based on prior interactio ns
with the Mayor and council members on this issue, and based on the language on the website that
sounds like this is a done deal, I am concerned that this comment process is nothing more than
lipstick on a pig. – Mark Fredrickson
11.I regularly walk my dog around the neighborhood and have plenty of opportunity to observe traffic
problems. What I see is primarily a failure to observe stop signs (of which there are probably too
many, but that’s another topic), and speeding in certain areas at certain times, which calls for
targeted enforcement. A blanket lower speed limit is an unenforceable feel-good solution to a
problem which is much narrower in scope, and will just lead to more scoff-law behavior (see stop
signs). – Henry Solmer, 4717 28th Street
12.I stongly disagree with the proposal to lower the speed limit on city streets. 20 mph is too slow and
is not necessary for safe driving in SLP. Please do NOT do this. – Betty Shaw, 2649 Huntington Ave
13.I am very much IN FAVOR of the proposed reduction in speed limits for St. Louis Park. Slower IS
safer. I hope this is put into effect. – Michael Hennen, 8200 33rd St #117
14.I have lived in St Louis Park for over 60 years. I have owned a home here for 35 years. I can not see
what ACTUAL problems we're going to solve with the proposed speed limit changes. Rather I think
it's more likely that you'll see road rage and larger differences in speeds between vehicles if these
changes are implemented, thus causing REAL issues. Just because the legislature makes something
possible doesn't mean it's a good idea to do. Just because Minneapolis and St Paul do something
does not mean it's a good idea. – Phil Martinson, 2565 Quebec Ave
15.This is the dumbest thing I’ve read in a long time. There is no need for this - unless the City is just
looking to collect more fees for all the speeding tickets the police will be issuing. We are NOT
Minneapolis and we don’t want to be!!! The amount of accidents on SLP streets do not justify this.
There is no way people will drive 25 mph on Cedar Lake Road or Minnetonka Blvd. I’m sorry but it’s
ridiculous. I live on the western side of SLP and will choose to drive west rather than east into the
city to run errands if this passes. I know there are those that want everyone to walk or ride bikes
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 16
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
6
but that is just not a reality for most people. The city council is micromanaging this city and it’s
going to drive everyone out. Stop wasting time on this. Please let me know how we can be a p art of
the vote on this matter. – Dan and Debby Schumacher
16.The 'Considered', 'Expected to be implemented', ordinance change in lowering speed limits in St.
Louis Park is ridiculous and unnecessary. Its consideration and implementation is and has been a
waste of money. It is, to be clear, another power grab and revenue snatch by local
government. Despicable!
While I greatly respect police officers and law and order, I have little respect for city council
members who make these types of speculative decisions . Creating a mobility system that prioritizes
walking first, then bicycling and transit, and then motor vehicle use. What a crock. – Richard Voshell
17.I got your postcard today, and I am very excited that you're considering lowering
speedlimits throughout the city. I believe that 25mph is being considered for Dakota Ave, where I
live. This is a wonderful start! It worries me how fast people drive through the neighborhoods, and
i think 20mph on most streets is perfectly reasonable. Please put me in the "strong, strong
supporter" column. I suppose I should write the councilpeople as well? – Jeremy Anderson, 3208
Dakota Ave
18.I support this. – Mike Robbins, 5623 Lake St.
19.Lowering the speed limit is the most ignorant thing I’ve ever seen! Does anyone live in the real
world in city hall? After the phony lockdown people are on edge and already angry, now your going
to fuel the fire and push people to the limit. This is just a money maker and you are going to turn
the Police loose on the citizens, this will not be good and no one will obey! Just when I think I’ve
seen it all, you come up with this! - Jeff Carlson
20.Saint Louis Park wants to reduce the speed limits. Sounds like Saint Louis Park. I live in SLP, and the
city behaves that way.
I have noticed an ongoing metropolitan effort to restrict driving. An example is 26th street in
Minneapolis. An entire lane is set off with plastic poles, reserved (I imagine) for bicycles. Another
lane is available for parking. This leaves two somewhat-squeezed lanes for traffic, whose lanes shift
from side to side at times, and occasionally are blocked by delivery trucks. Traffic is cramped, has to
go from side-to-side, and is slowed. Now, I realize traffic managers want to slow traffic, but that is
no way to treat a one-way street! 26th and 28th streets used to be convenient and efficient ways to
travel. Nicollet avenue is missing from Lake street to 29th street -- and as soon as Nicollet was
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 17
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
7
blocked by the construction of the K-Mart, the city was proposing to close one-way Blaisdell and 1st
avenue S so the bridges over the railroad between Lake street and 29th street could be demolished
and replaced.
Right. Let's shut down a major avenue of commerce, and the convenient one way streets running
alongside it. People won't mind. That one didn't happen, thank heavens, but as a consolation prize,
the city planners made a short section of 1st avenue into a two-way street.
Okay, automobiles are an unmitigated evil upon the earth, and must be discouraged. Okay, okay.
I've heard it enough to think some governments actually believe it. But jammed-up traffic emits
even more fumes than smooth traffic. Bicycle lanes? Sometimes they're good, but this is Minnesota.
I've known a few people who ride bikes to work during winter, but I've seen very few out on the
streets in January. So we should all take buses? I have a friend who rides buses, and she says the
routes and schedules are slowly diminishing. Electric cars? This is Minnesota. Batteries don't work
well in the cold, and we're running low on electricity generation. (Cf. California and Texas.) Where
will we get the electricity to charge all those batteries?
And don't get me going on the way Saint Louis Park handles stop signs at T intersections. – Ellen R.
Kuhfeld, PhD
21.I don’t see a place to register objections to reducing the speed limit to 20 on the majority of the
streets in SLP. Please consider this my objection and pass it on to the deciders. I hope this hasn’t
been decided yet and that signs haven’t been ordered. If this proposed change happens, it will drive
people nuts and could lead to road rage. Has every single council member spent a week driving 20 -
miles per hour in the city? Or even a day? – Cindy Jurgensen, 4209 Browndale Ave
22.I would urge speed limits no lower than 25 miles/hour. – Marcos B
23.Bravo! – Chris & Peggy Klug, 8312 Virginia Circle N
24.Since this is all about safety and protecting pedestrians, why do half of the dog
walkers/walkers/joggers on Goodrich Avenue do it in the street when there are sidewalks on either
side??? The City just spent a lot of money and installed a huge sidewalk on my property last year,
yet most people are walking in the middle of the street. Please answer me that. You'll have 0
fatalities if people use sidewalks and that is what this is all about - safety and preventing injuries. –
Bradley Widseth
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 18
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
8
25.I'm a Ward 4 resident and just wanted to provide some resident feedback on the plan to lower
speed limits in St. Louis Park. First of all, I definitely agree with the overall goal to lower traffic
speeds within the city and the other goals laid out in the draft Speed Limit Evaluation. I'm
concerned, however, that the city will be unable to meet those goals by simply lowering the speed
limit. Drivers tend to travel at the speed that a road is designed to support, the speed that drivers
feel comfortable driving at. I worry that lowering speed limits without also adding significant traffic
calming measures will not have a material impact on the speed that cars travel (Cedar Lake Rd.,
Texas Ave, Louisiana Ave in particular). It could also result in great speed differentials between
vehicles traveling at either the speed limit or the speed that the road supports.
Is there a plan to narrow or remove lanes of traffic or other traffic calming techniques to make these
new speed limits more realistic? I don't think police enforcement of speed limits is sustainable (or
ethical outside of truly reckless behavior). Cedar Lake Rd is a good example. It feels natural to drive
at 35mph. East of Louisiana it feels dangerous to go greater than 35 due to the new width of the
road and the bump-outs at intersections. West of Louisana (West of Texas really), it feels pretty
natural to travel 40 or even 45 since there is no parking along that stretch and the perceived width
of the road is much wider than the actual lane width. It makes crossing the road as a pedestrian or
biking along the road feel extremely hazardous. Texas north of Cedar Lake Road and Louisana south
of Minnetonka are other examples. The current layout of those roads gives a perceived width closer
to a suburban county highway than a residential street and cars regularly travel at speeds that
reflect that. I don't think changing the speed limit will change that since the existing speed limit is
already significantly lower than the speed that people feel comfortable driving at. I hope t here are
bigger plans than just lowering the speed limit to actually address these issues. – Peter Robbins
26.I have seen some interesting things take place, but wow, this is some feel -good lawmaking. Tell
people to use the sidewalks that are forced upon property owners. More cracking down and
controlling citizens is never the answer. More white people shaming? Have we not learned
anything over the last year? – mnm
27.While I see the reasoning for altering speed limits to a lower common rate of 20mph, this is a speed
that is way too slow with regard to how wide roads or right of way traffic directions occur with stop
signs/lights. Please consider leaving or raising limits where applicable to 40 or 35 mph, not lowering.
–Patrick Gallo
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 19
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
9
28.I think this is a truly terrible idea, unless the primary goal is to raise money through speeding tickets.
Changing the speed limits on thoroughfares will not reduce traffic speeds; it will increase the
number of scofflaws on the road. It is particularly ridiculous to drop the speed limit to 25 mph on
Cedar Lake Road and Louisiana. – Sarah Porter, 9255 23rd Street
29.Got your postcard today about the proposed speed limit changes. Have not read through the whole
package but what jumped out at me is you have your priorities totally backwards. "Slower speed
limits promote a mobility system that prioritizes walking first, then bicycling and transit, and then
motor vehicle use." Roads are for cars and transit. Quit ripping out car lanes and replacing them
with bike lanes. And enough with the stupid round-a-bouts already. You are on the way to making
this city a real mess. – Candace
30.As an 11 year resident of St Louis Park I strongly oppose the proposed speed limit changes. Reducing
the speed limit does nothing to curb failure the yield, already pointed out as the number 1 reason
for fatal accidents. This will be nothing more than an inconvenience for everyone and will save no
one. This is an extremely poor use of tax payer dollars with no benefit. The idea that someh ow a
distracted, poorly instructed, or otherwise oblivious driver will somehow cause less damage with a
lower speed limit is laughably off. I come at this as an engineer, cyclist, motorcycle rider, and avid
car enthusiast. Please do not impose this poorly thought out policy! – Ben Halsten
31.I live on Utica Ave & 27th St. This is a dangerous corner as cars coming off Hwy 100 and cutting
through the neighborhood are not stopping or just barely or just rolling through. Cars are going so
fast down Utica Ave. What we need that I have seen in other area’s is a hexagon stop sign with
flashing lights around the rim. You see it from a distance. It’s just a matter of time when there will
be a bad situation. – Marilyn Holzer
32.I live on Wooddale Ave, South of Excelsior blvd., and while I appreciate the attempt at slowing down
cars on this street, I know a speed limit drop will not phase them. The stop sign on 41st creates a
drag strip to get the green light on Excelsior blvd with cars racing up daily. They won’t slow down in
fear of a ticket. I believe that physical barriers will be far more effective (speed bumps, narrower
street, chicanes). Has the city ever considered such options over tying up police resources to enforce
lower speed limits that never work, especially in the absence of enforcement? – Nik Papazois
33.According to the suggested lower speed limits, Cedar Lake Road would be reduced to 25
mph. That's 10 mph slower than currently in effect. That's too slow! Reducing the speed by 5 mph
would be acceptable, but 10 mph isn't a good idea. No one will go that speed!
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 20
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
10
Edina did that on W. 70th St. east of Hwy 100, and I won't take that street again. It's ridiculously
slow. 25 mph on local streets thru neighborhoods is great, but I'm opposed to this new reduction in
speed.
Please listen to the residents of SLP. Lowering speed limits so drastically will hurt our city not help
it. – Barb Person
34.Your plan to reduce the speed limits on residential roads is welcome. You are being much too
aggressive on Louisiana however. This is a major artery connecting the city with relatively little
pedestrian traffic. If the goal is safety I believe you’re throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Louisiana should be 35mph. 25 is completely outrageous. – Matthew Hartloff
35.I am against the proposed lowering of the speed limits in St. Louis Park. So are every neighbor that I
have spoken to about this. How can we find out which City Council people supported the changes
and which ones opposed it so that we can take action at the ballot boxes? – Bruce Kloehn
36.First of all, I am a biker just so you know that. But having said that I do not favor lowering the speed
limits. We would all be safer if we all just walked! Obviously, that is not the solution and carried to
an extreme. But reducing the speed limits as much as you are proposing in my opinion is an
extreme as well. In todays world a few liberals seem to make all of us cater to their liking and this is
no different. Until such time as vehicles are NOT the primary mode of transportation why in the
world are we limiting them NOW? I do not understand. Bad drivers or bad people on foot or bike
often are the ones that cause an accident, not careful drivers. Why penalize us? I have not had a
moving violation or accident in about 20 years. Its been so long I cannot remember when and was
told by a SLP police officer once who checked my driving record after stopping me for a burnt out
license plate light “Boy, you were not kidding about your record! There is nothing on it!”
Ok, if we must adjust our daily lives for the few liberals pounding the table constantly for change
then here are several of my objections if we must live with lower speed limits. I will tell you that
Edina reduced the speed on 70th Street to 20 mph about a year ago and friends of mine who live off
that street and travel it often are really upset. I have travelled it as well often to get to France
Avenue off Hwy 100. It is a wide street with sidewalks well away from the road. It does have a
school there and clearly the speed limit while kids are in school should be 20 mph. So the question
comes up, “Why are we paying taxes to widen our streets to protect better the ones on foot and
bike and then penalize someone like me that drives?” I do not see the logic. The logic seems to be
to protect the few that voice their concerns and are heard over the majority who would not favor
this change! If you say not true, then where is the city vote that occurred to support this change by
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 21
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
11
the city population? I cannot believe it would ever pass! So it does not exist I am sure. Side streets
at 20 mph, of course it should be.
Being against the entire thing to begin with, here are specifics that do not make sense to me.
The city needs some main routes that are north and south or east and west to get across the city
easier and faster. We live in a world that gets faster everyday, not one that is slowing down. Those
routes should not be limited as much as you propose similar to 70th Street in Edina.
I have no problem with 20 mph on the streets that are off the main roads because that is where
there is often not a stop sign at every corner in both directions, etc. and that is where most likely an
accident will occur.
Cedar Lake Road is the main east and west road for the north side of SLP, Minnetonka Blvd in the
middle and either highway 7 or Excelsior Blvd to the south. Those main arteries should not be
limited further from what current speed limits and certainly not down to 25 mph from 35 mph on
Cedar Lake Road (a -10 mph drop). This would never pass a popular vote and I would almost bet my
life on it!
Louisiana speed limit of 30 mph currently on the stretch starting at where the library is to highway 7
is unrealistic. Its two wide lanes! And the sidewalks and are far away from the street and you even
built a footbridge over it for people to cross it with tax dollars by the library! The speed limit there
should be more than 30 mph, that is why you are not proposing to reduce it now because it is
already to slow.
To summarize, we should keep a few key roads in the city at a faster speed to encourage their use
over side streets and focus tax dollars on those streets to widen them if you are so concerned about
people on feet or bike. And the most important of all is this. We are suppose to be a democratic
society where I believe the majority should have a say. Put this whole thing to a vote or do a survey
of all the residences to see what they really want, not YOUR vision of the future from other places. I
doubt that a reduced speed limit campaign exists in all parts of our country (for instance South
Dakota). I will go along with any changes that are driven by common sense and the support of the
majority of the people. But I do not favor something being “driven” (pun intended) down our
throats without a say. This is my say! Put it to a vote if you believe so much that this is the best for
all concerned. PUT IT TO A VOTE! – Bruce Siegfried, Westwood Hills Curve
37.Is this to raise more funds for the city with tickets? Is it going to be all the police is doing is giving
speeding tickets because these limits are ridiculous! Where I need to drive to is too far to ride bike
and by the way I love biking. This is Minnesota, we don’t have 12 months of biking weather anyway.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 22
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
12
It’s not going to get any more people on their bike then are already biking. How came up with this
brilliant idea anyway? – Lorna Pommrehn
38.Please do not lower speed limits to 20 mph! That’s just too slow! People might move because of
this, then you will have a lower tax base, which won’t be good for the city’s development and
growth. I urge the city to reconsider! – Ed Kashmarek
39.I LIVE ON CLUB ROAD & I FEEL THIS IS A WONDERFUL IDEA, PLEASE LOWER THE SPEED LIMITS AS I
FEEL THE SMALL CHILDREN IN OUR AREA ARE AT GREAT RISK AS THEY RIDE THEIR BIKES &
SCOOTERS ON CLUB RD, AS MANY CARS ARE GOING TOO FAST TO STOP FOR THEM!!! – Jean Louise
Burns
40.I do NOT approve of the new speed limits! The money should be spent teaching people how to
drive! – Thomas Sincheff
41.While there is clearly a different result from impact at 30 mph vs 20 mph (this is indeed intuitive),
there is nothing here to indicate that the root cause of any of the accidents reported on was the
result of persons obeying the current traffic laws. This study presents a false argument... 20 mph
might be safer than 30 mph, but that does not imply that 30 mph is unsafe. One could argue that 15
mph or 10 mph are even safer. Why are we not considering these? If the answer to that question is
that those speeds are just not practical, I would agree but hasten to add that the proposed changes
are also not practical.
There are many behaviors that can make being on the road unsafe, and we need to make sure that
our laws prohibit these behaviors and that our police enforce these laws better. When people are
paying attention, being respectful, and obeying traffic laws, there are no accidents. Let me repeat
that. When people are paying attention, being respectful, and obeying traffic laws, there are no
accidents. Reducing the speed limits to minimize the negative impact resulting from people opting
to not pay attention or be respectful is wrongheaded. That inconveniences everybody to negate the
behavior of a few.
I do not think the City Council has done their due diligence on this issue. As this impacts every
citizen of and every visitor to St Louis Park, it is vitally important that you get widespread feedback
on this proposed change. I reached out to you because you did not reach out to me. I received a
mailer the other day with information on the proposal, but no avenue to provide feedback. I have
yet to talk with one citizen of this City that thinks this is a good idea, which leads me to believe that
if you were to conduct an honest survey that truly represents a cross section of our population, you
would find that this is not a wanted change.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 23
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
13
To pass this change, patting yourself on the back and claiming that you have made us all safer would
be a lie, both to yourself and to your constituents. – Carl Robertson
42.I strongly support the change to 20 mph on single-lane two-way residential streets like mine (I live at
3730 Inglewood Ave S). We spend a lot of time outdoors with many young children playing in their
yard and 30 mph seems too fast. I also think the proposed change to 25mph for residential
arterioles like 38th is also a good idea.
On the other hand, I think multi-lane two-way streets with few intersections such as Beltline should
be higher than the current 30 mph and changed to 35 mph; the proposed change to 25 mph seems
way too low. And I think multilane streets with many intersections like Wooddale are fine at the
current 30 mph. – Dave Klein, 3730 Inglewood Ave
43.I have been following the speed limit review and I can’t say that it matters much to me, I drive slow
and do not use my cell phone (much bigger issue), but I have a couple of observations and requests.
We just sent out a postcard with “community outreach”, but it does not direct you to a place to
provide feedback.
I think if you survey the citizens, 80% of them would not support lower speed limits or the costs to
do it.
I think this gives police one more reason to pull over virtually anyone for any reason. (exceeding 20
miles per hour)
I think it would be useful for the full council and city staff to commit to driving 20 miles per hour or
less, or less than the proposed speed limits, until you make the final decision, just to feel the impact
and see if you still think it is right.
–Curt Rahman, Walker Lake Business Association
44.Imagine my surprise at receiving a post card from St. Louis Park informing me that "Adjusted Speed
Limits Coming Soon" even though the City has not yet adopted an ordinance to this effect. Talk
about not feeling valued! I now feel that there is no point in providing my input to the Mayor and
Council on any issue because your minds are already made up. I deserve better.
Having said that, I will comment on this issue because the proposed ordinance is such a bad idea.
I agree that people speed on city streets, but the answer to this problem is not a new ordinance but
to enforce the laws you already have. A new ordinance won't do any more good than the existing
ordinance if it is not enforced. Perhaps you will increase enforcement, at least for a while, but that
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 24
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
14
won't be permanent because the police force is already stretched thin and the city faces many more
challenging issues.
Furthermore, what will it cost for new signs for the reduced speed limits? $200,000? The city must
have lots of extra money. If not, the money you do have could be put to much better use than new
speed limit signs, there are so many needs in our community.
Given the postcard I received, I realize that my comments are useless because the city is determined
to adopt the ordinance. Even so, I hope you will reconsider this proposed (sort of) ordinance.
45.I was so relieved to get the postcard that SLP is looking at speed limits. I live just off of Minnetonka
Blvd, and am stunned at how fast people drive, not to mention how many people honk at me
because I am driving the speed limit. – Janet Pelto, 2920 Monterey Ave
46.I just got a notice in the mail that speed limits on most roads are dropping to an unreasonable
20MPH, which is even slower than a typical bicycle. I never heard anything about this during the
supposed comment period, and as a voter and taxpayer am extremely unhappy with this change. –
James VanDenBerg
47.I am writing tonight with comments on the proposed speed limit changes in SLP. I support most of
the plan, but have some reservations on certain aspects.
I support the following:
•The switch to 20MPH on the side residential streets. Most streets you honestly can't (or
shouldn't) get going faster than that anyway with the stop signs and it is just safer for all
of us, especially younger residents and folks on bikes.
•Slowing down Texas Ave to 25MPH. I am actually curious why it isn't being slowed to
25MPH south of Hwy 7. There's a lot of residential there, it would seem to make sense
and be less confusing.
I do not support the following:
•Reduced speed on the more heavily traveled main streets of Louisiana Ave and Cedar
Lake Road, at least not to the extent proposed.
•Louisiana - I agree that Louisiana can and should probably be slower north of Cedar Lake
Rd, partly because it is so much narrower, but I think it should remain at 30MPH south
of there.
•Cedar Lake Road - I would support a speed reduction to 30MPH to match Louisiana Ave
from Texas Ave eastward, but not 25MPH. I do support a reduction to 25MPH west of
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 25
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
15
Texas Avenue as you approach the school, as there are so many more kids walking to
and from home.
Questions/other comments
•I am curious about 36th St and why it is being kept at 30 MPH, especially with the Rec
Center. I know there has been talk of a roundabout at Beltline, so maybe that would be
addressed at that point. I think it is confusing to have such a short stretch at 30MPH,
especially since that doesn't seem like a major street like Louisiana Ave and CLR, which
would be slower than this stretch for much of their length. It seems like it would be
safer and less confusing to have 36th match Monterey and Beltline. I realize it is more
commercial, but there is still a lot of foot traffic. Also, the lack of a bike lane makes that
stretch very precarious for cyclists. I remember doing a Bike the Park ride many years
ago and that was the scariest stretch for many riders in the group. Slowing cars down
would definitely help.
Overall, I appreciate the work being done to keep streets safe and improve foot and bike travel in
the city, but do hope you reconsider certain aspects of the proposed changes. – Emily Barker,
Cobblecrest Neighborhood
48.I have lived in St. Louis Park all my life (Over 60 year). The speed limits seem reasonable. I totally
disagree with the decision to change the speed limits. To change the speed limit it 20,25 makes no
sense. From what I understand most of the accidents are with pedestrians. I think the real issue is
that it is very confusing to know who has the right aways at the intersections and cross walks. Many
pedestrians and bikers don’t look before they enter an intersection because they assume they
always have the right away.
Many bikers ride faster than 20 miles/hour. Will they be ticketed? The map shows that Mtka Blvd
and Cedar Lake Road will be at 25 miles/hour. It is ridiculous that you think that it is motorist will
abide by this as bikers cruise by them.
I suggest education is the best approach. Teach pedestrians and motorist who has the right way.
Just because other cities are doing this doesn’t mean it’s right for our city. – Andrea Chazin
49.just read the card sent out in regards to Adjusting Speed Limits in the area, this is great news,
something was needed. Too bad all have to suffer for a few. We live at the end of the reduction on
Louisiana Ave and from what I see the next block south it goes back to 30, why put that temptation
back to the traffic, the people speeding north will not reduce till they get to Minnetonka lights and
the people going south will just keep speeding up as they go through the neighborhood since they
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 26
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
16
know it increases, I can see this being a problem for this 2-3 block stretch. It really makes sense to
run it all the way down to the roundabout, but you can't fight city hall right . If you can't change
it all the way down, then is there any way you can change the start of the 25mph an other block
south, so that it starts just before Library Lane, and also put up a speed reduction notice sign just
before that so they know to reduce?
This extra block also might help keep people slower longer as they are coming south from Mtka
Blvd.
The normal local traffic is usually ok, it is the trucks and illicit activity that are the concerns for
us. These fully loaded trucks fly through here, definitely over 30mph, 20 ft from our bed, it is pretty
bad, our house shakes and items rattle on the shelf pretty much all day and occasionally at
night, this activity has changed greatly since the roundabout, some of this might be the condition of
the road but slowing them down might help. I have always wondered if this heavy vibration would
affect our utility lines coming in off the street and our foundation, do you know? Then the illicit
activity, been going on a couple of years, they are pretty bold in their business, and they love racing
around here a lot, along with their friends that stop over, hoping this will calm them down
some. They should know it is coming as a couple of them live in this neighborhood.
Just want to thank everyone there that put this together!!! – Jeff Looft, 3120 Louisiana Ave
50.I'm not sure if this is the right email address so feel free to forward this if necessary. I'm a SLP and I
wanted to express my support for the plan to reduce speed limits on residential streets. The
increased safety is well worth the marginal increase in driving times. Thanks for all you do! – Mallory
Manning, Meadowbrook Neighborhood
51.When is the city council meeting regarding this? I do not see a date published and this is not okay.
This is a money grabbing ploy for the city to gain funds.
Lower the speed on side streets for safety or whatever but the main roads like Texas, Louisiana and
Cedar Lake do not need to be lowered. 30 is slow enough. Why not enforce those limits instead of
lowering them? People are constantly speeding on them.
It's going to cause traffic jams and St Louis Park will be avoided by people shopping.
Remember you need young people to move here, spend money here and this is an absolute
nightmare to have to creep along on those main roads. It will deter people from buying homes and
settling down. Source, I am young and will absolutely avoid doing any business in St Louis Park.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 27
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
17
I'd like to join the city meeting. I need the date, time and location. Will it be available online through
Zoom? – Danielle Schmidt
52.Hi, I am all in favor of reducing speed limits in SLP. If there is someone else I should tell this to,
please let me know.
I bike. I dont have a car. I grew up in the Netherlands. I do not want a car. On the roadways in SLP, I
weekly have a person (usually a man in a truck) purposefully drive into me / into the bike lane --
perhaps to "show me" that I should not be on the road.
PS Right now, on NextDoor there is a massive heated debate about speed limits / bikers on the
roadway in SLP. I cannot read it; cuz when I have in the past, the long dialogue was so
hateful against BIKERS (like me) that I got sick....
In sum, I am 62. I live on Colorado Avenue. I often feel unsafe while biking - sometimes on Woodale I
squoosh over onto the sidewalk.
Squoosh is the operative word! – Patricia Jo Bungert
53.I have seen the maps that show the changes in speed limits. It follows what has been done in
Minneapolis and St. Paul. I see a problem with compliance and enforcement. I have noticed in St.
Paul that when I follow the speed limit on Cretin Avenue, I have a line of cars right behind
me. Drivers don't follow the speed limit and get irritated with people who do. I live just off Texas
Avenue and notice that too few follow the current limit. My suggestion is that instead of lowering
the speed limits the police enforce the current limits. – Barb Divinski, 8015 34th 1/2 St
54.I do not appreciate this change regardless of whatever study was done. As a 55 year resident of
ward 4 in St. Louis Park, this change makes no sense.
What would make sense is throwing more money at enforcing the already posted speed limits . And
jail time for repeat offenders or making them do community projects with the money they would
have paid in fines.
I live on Jersey Avenue South between 394 and Cedar Lake Road. It continues to be a racetrack,
especially in the summer.
Find ways to enforce the speed limits instead of buying new signs for unenforceable speed limits.
Most cars these days do not even go 20 - 25 mph without riding the brakes.
It is a ridiculous waste of money. Sort of like the round-a-bouts, but worse. At least traffic lights
make people slow down and stop! Don't get me started on round -a-bouts.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 28
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
18
Another and better idea is to study and build sidewalks to keep people off the roadways . Lets
invest in sidewalks in neighborhoods! What a concept. I know this idea has been tossed around for
many years. It was a good thing when sidewalks were finally installed on Cedar Lake Road! But
where are the sidewalks for those safe walks to school for our children?
I went to the Junior High School, and there continue to be sidewalks only half the way to that school
building.
Thank you Tim for questioning 25 mph on Cedar Lake Road. "Councilmember Tim Brausen had a
different objection as he said a 25 mph limit would be too low and therefore would not be practical
for Cedar Lake Road." I recall being amazed when it went from 30 mph to 35 mph.
Since we had one communication from the city, and a post card today, and one article in the Sun
Sailor, I think that there will be a lot of surprised citizens when this ridiculous idea becomes reality.
Without combing through all of the council minutes, I would like to know exactly how many
pedestrian incidents were cited in the study. What were the circumstances surrounding the
incident. Were the drivers at fault or the pedestrian? What are the ages of the drivers and
pedestrians in the incidents, and what season was it when the incidents occurred?
Our sidewalks are not always walkable in snowy seasons even when there is a sidewalk! There is
way too much speeding on all roadways in our community. Parents of young children do not
supervise their little ones well while they are in the street on bicycles and other wheeled toys. As a
retired pediatric nurse, I cringe at this lack of supervision.
I am really concerned that this will just create more work for our police. When we lower the speed
limits, will we be adding officers to enforce the lowered limits? They are not able to keep up with
the limits where they are now!
While you are at it, let's create communities with meeting places where ideas like this can be heard
in person. In the past there were places like this in the community within walking distance. In my
community, we lost Eliot School as one of those places. There is nothing that would accommodate a
group of people anymore. Instead, we could watch the council meetings on cable TV, if you have,
and can afford cable. I can just see all the little households tuning in ... Oh, hey honey, what should
we watch tonight? The next episode of the Voice, xyz tv show, or the city council meeting?
Get in the car with all the kids and go to a community meeting at the huge SLP community center to
hear an idea ... Right.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 29
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
19
Change is continuous. This change proposal makes no sense and is a waste of taxpayer dollars like
the lovely trees that were planted, died and were dug up for sewer improvement s on Cedar Lake
Road.
Why is the last published "Planning Study" from January 2008? It is 2021.
Through the few communications it seems as though this decision has already been made. I do not
envision that it will have much community support or compliance. – Wendy Sandstrom, 2013 Jersey
Ave
55.I live near Oak Hill Park and have been hearing about the planned reduction in speed limit. I honestly
didn't think anything of it...seemed harmless and in line with Mpls and St. Paul's new rules.
But after the shooting of Daunte Wright I am more aware of the potential extreme negative
consequences of traffic stops. Let's not add another reason for police to stop people of color in our
community. It just doesn't seem necessary right now.
No one is really going to drive 20 all the time around town, let's aim to reduce discretionary police
traffic stops. – Jane Betchel
56.I've been a homeowner in St. Louis Park since 1993. We moved from Minneapoli and I was always
surprised that the city allowed 30 mph on side streets. It's incredibly dangerous especially since
there aren't sidewalks. You have parked cars on both sides of the street as well as pedestrian and
car traffic. I know other suburbs have made reductions in speed limits as well.
Don't be discouraged if you get some complaints, most of us would rather be safe on our
walks. Since the pandemic there are more families, children, pets, old people and bikes utilizing the
streets out on walks. – Sherry Quick
57.I think the proposals may be difficult for all St Louis Park residents/travelers, but I do support what
researchers and experts say will reduce serious injury or fatalities. Therefore, I will support the new
limits and reinforce the importance to my friends, family and co-workers at Methodist Hospital. It
appears that the street I live on – Utica Ave (HiWay 100 frontage road) is not city owned and will not
be impacted. That saddens me as we have many children in our neighborhood and I would like a 20
MPH speed. – Patti Betlach
58.I’m thinking you aren’t requesting opinions or having a public hearing. However, taking main traffic
routes like Texas and Louisiana and reducing the speed limit to 25 is not what traffic needs. If you
have speeders, enforce 30MPG. If you are after drag racers, let’s talk about HWY 7 and the increase
in speed limit there. I sure would like to see that go back to 45MPG. – Connie Hessevick, 3625
Sumter Ave
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 30
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
20
59.Regarding residential speed limits, I am happy to hear of the City’s efforts to adjust the residential
speed limits. I live along Wooddale Avenue and walk the neighborhood. The current 30-mile-an-
hour speed limit is ignored by a good numbers of passers through. Particularly with the addition of
the bicycle lane, reducing the speed of the traffic in this area is wise. – Ramona Johnson, 4280
Wooddale Ave
60.Lowering speed limits on the city streets of St. Louis Park is a great idea! Please consider lowering
the speed limit on the stretch of road between 4900 Cedar Lake Road (the stop sign) and the Jewish
Community Center. Cars being driven at 30 mph or more is dangerous to the many walkers and
bikers in this very recreational area. Before the pandemic the traffic levels were very bad at certain
times of the day. It is difficult to pull out on to the road from the parking lots of the condos and
townhouses there. For years the neighborhood has been trying to get the speed limit lowered or
speed bumps put in place. – Jann Nelson, South Cedar Trails Townhomes
61.I have been a resident of SLP since 1983. I recall that several decades ago the city also had the goal
of slowing cars down on city streets. The solution was to install 4-way stop signs on many of the
residential intersections. The idea was that drivers could only accelerate so much before they had
to stop at the next intersection. For the most part that has worked.
What has been happening more and more frequently in recent years is that drivers are not coming
to a stop. Many of them glance in both directions and then blow through the intersection. I know
because we live near the intersection of Sunset and Huntington and can see the intersection from
our living room.
The traffic laws are not being enforced very much now. Drivers who blow through stop signs will
not keep their speed below 20 mph. Common sense and human nature tells us that. All the
reduced speed limits will do is make normally law-abiding citizens break the law by driving at the
natural speed of 25 or 30 mph when it is safe to do so.
Anyway, this is my opinion, and I wish that you will convey this to the relevant decision makers. –
Joseph Kapusta, 2855 Huntington Ave
62.Lowering the speed limits. This is the dumbest proposed use of tax payer dollars available. Don’t
change the speed limits. Do something productive. Increase police spending to enforce traffic laws,
don’t punish the people who follow them. “Hey I have an idea, instead of punishing the people who
break the law, let’s just punish everyone in our city limits.” I’ll vote against every idiot who puts this
dumb change in place. Do something else with your li fe, this certainly isn’t a good use of it. – Mark
Madison
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 31
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
21
63.I want to voice my opposition to speed limit changes on major thoroughfares in SLP. I am all for
safer streets and am ok reducing most side street speed limits to 20 mph. However, I do not think
that streets like Cedar Lake Road and Louisiana Ave should be reduced to 25 mph. These are major
thoroughfares that already have a lot of traffic at busy times of the day. A lower speed limit will
increase traffic volumes and cause longer commutes. Additionally, it feels like Cedar Lake Road
should match the Minnetonka Blvd county set speed limit. - David Winter, 8206 Westwood Hills
Curve
64.I’m a resident of St Louis Park and am interested in your help to understand the status of adopting
an ordinance to change (reduce) speed limits on SLP city streets.
Per the page link below from the city website,
Will you please share more information about how “the city is conducting public outreach...”?
Where? How? Who? When?
What feedback/input has been collected from this “public outreach”?
When will the city council vote to adopt this speed limit ordinance? – Andrea Greene, 2720 Florida
Ave
65.I am against this proposal. I am not a speeder. This is not necessary. – Sue Witt
66.As an avid biker, I appreciate safer drivers. But I doubt lowering the limits will be worth the expense
and effort. I oppose the lowering of the limits. – Steven P. Kenny, 9200 28th St
67.I just wanted to write that I am very pleased with the recommended new lower speed limit of 25
mph for Belt Line Blvd and Monterey Drive. I also think that extending the 25 mph to 36th Street W
would be a good idea, in that it would encourage drivers to shift to a slower speed as they approach
Belt Line Blvd and Monterey Drive. In practice, to most drivers, Monterey Drive and 36th Street W
are the same street. With new bicycle lanes and waking paths, I hope that the slower speeds will
add to the safety of all. – Lee Kamel
68.As a resident of St Louis Park, I am totally in favor of speed limits being reduced on city streets. I
want to comment on Cedar Lake Road, Louisiana Avenue and Texas Avenue. They are residential
streets, except for a small stretch where Cedar Lake Road and Louisiana Avenue intersect. These
roads have recommended speed limits as 25 mph.
20 mph is a good speed for residential streets. According to the map published on the SLP website
the recommended speed limit for most streets is 20 mph. Cedar Lake Road, Louisiana Avenue and
Texas Avenue are streets with more traffic, is this why the recommended speed limit is 25. I
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 32
22
sincerely hope that the city council goes along with the recommended speeds currently posted on
the website today and you are not considering that the speed limit be anything faster than 25 mph
on Cedar Lake Road, Louisiana and Texas. Thank you for what you are doing and taking time to read
my comments. One last thing, it is disappointing that the speed limit change is being delayed. –
Betty Carlson
69.If you're out there and not in a car, you see the same things I do when I'm out walking or running --
way too many cars either unaware or uncaring that they are going too fast. On all kinds of streets.
This seems like a slam dunk, common sense thing to do so that people know that hey, doing 28
down a neighborhood street isn't ok. Doing 42 down Cedar Lake Road isn't ok. I hope that we keep
building safer streets to really drive those speeds down but this can be part of the p lan, too. Bring
the limits and speed expectations in line with the rest of the world as a 1st step toward more sanity
out there.
I do worry the council will be afraid to take action on this in the current environment because I've
seen some bad-faith (in my estimation) or at least misplaced arguments on NextDoor/Facebook
claiming that this is going to be a police excuse to hassle people, with everything that entails.
Ordinarily I'd be very sympathetic to that kind of argument but I just don't see pedestrian (and
auto!) safety as a police matter at all. I don't see the existing speed limits being enforced by ticketing
so I wouldn't expect the new ones to, either. I've actually seen people citing this as a reason to do
nothing but I can think of all kinds of laws we follow to varying degrees without constant police
intervention. Which isn't an argument in favor of anarchy. Simply put--high auto speeds are a
problem which on some streets are completely legal; we really need to change that.
I just want drivers to slow down a tad so that we can all enjoy the experience of being outside of a
car a bit more, without fear of death. You don't need police enforcement of traffic laws to make that
happen. The last-measured average speed on my part of Jersey Ave. was 25.6. It is extremely
unpleasant, especially with the size of some of these vehicles, to share space with something that
can carry that much force. If people see and know that the speed limit is 20, I do think that they'll
slow down a bit, especially when they pass a pedestrian (we even don't have sidewalks so I really
feel it when someone blows by at 25-30).
Please take bike and pedestrian safety seriously and adopt the recommended speed limit changes.
And thanks for your time! I can really rant on on this topic! – Patrick Baldwin, 1825 Jersey Ave
Comments by phone (summaries from various staff):
Page 33
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
23
70.An older woman who lives on Cedar Lake road near Ford road called for some basic information on
the speed limit changes, and also gave her input: she is very happy about this, feels people are used
to driving fast without regard for pedestrians, especially older or disabled people. Thinks there is too
much “it’s all about me, get out of my way” attitude with drivers, that they feel they can do
whatever they want. Is very bothered that people tailgate her when she is going the speed limit,
especially on the frontage road (Wayzata Blvd). She talks to other people her age and they tend to
agree with her, that people drive too fast.
71.Hopes that this will actually result in people driving slower, wondering if people who like to speed
can change. Likes the focus on pedestrians, this is much needed. It can be very stressful to be an
older pedestrian crossing streets. We need to adjust our thinking, slow down to a comfortable pace,
a deeper way of thinking (regard for others). She did not want to leave her name or contact info.
72.Donald Hirasuna, 2821 Ottawa Ave, called to let us know he is very much against sidewalks (I believe
he meant on his street). For one thing, he has a large elm tree that has been alive since the 1940s,
and since there are so few of these old trees, he doesn’t want it to be taken down. For another, he is
legally blind, and says most people do not shovel their sidewalks, leaving them icy and dangerous. In
addition, cars drive faster “like maniacs” when there are sidewalks. He would rather walk on the
street where it’s safer, doesn’t want to have to worry about falling.
73.A resident, who lives at 4050 Wooddale, called to ask about the speed limit changes. She says
lowering to 25 mph doesn’t make a difference, generally thinks people drive too fast around here.
She says traffic has doubled in the past two years, and there are a lot of motorcyclists and
construction trucks that are very noisy, and drive too fast. She thinks people should be slower in
residential areas. Thinks people from Edina are using the street to get to Hy 100. She says she called
about Wooddale being a collection street, because of a bike trail (?) and she is concerned about the
increased traffic with little kids in the area, with the school nearby. She has lived in her house all her
life, and says the traffic patterns have changed, and impacted the homes.
74.Caroline Lazo (?), 3506 Minikahda Ct #2, called to say she does not have a car, hasn’t driven for 25
years, and feels this correspondence is for drivers and she would like to be taken off the list for
notifications. She did not leave a callback number
75.Anonymous caller, no address: Lowering the speed limits seems like regressive thinking, for an older
community, not thinking forward for a younger community. Maybe we could enforce the speed
limits already in place and see how that works rather than making us a geriatric community.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 34
Emailed and phone speed limit feedback
24
76.Anonymous caller, lives at 25 ½ St: Thank you so much for the new speed limits- I hope the
consideration will turn into new signs. My street is very dangerous. Thank you so much for doing this
and making SLP a safe place to walk.
77.Anonymous I live at 27th and Inglewood, and the problem is that no one stops at the stop signs,
they just roll through, and then speed down Inglewood. Would prefer that there be ticketing or
some other enforcement, and community education so people actually stop. But am in favor of
lowering the speed limit also, and maybe speed bumps.
78.Marilyn Lingwall, 4211 Ottawa Ave, called to give her feedback on the proposed speed limits she is
very much in favor of lowering the speed limits. She lives at 4211 Ottawa, and says cars speed on
both Ottawa and 42nd St all the time. She called a year or so ago, and the city installed a speed limit
radar tracker, but she says cars slow down when they see them. She also had wanted stop signs for
that corner, but says the city said there wasn’t enough traffic. She says there are kids and animals on
her street, and mentioned several times how happy she is about the speed limit change.
79.5/17: Didn’t provide name. Called saying the city needs low speed limits on local streets. Cars drive
too fast on my street.
80.5/4: Didn’t provide name. I’m not really for changing speed limits. Had clarifying questions on
specific speeds and streets.
81.5/4: Karen Christensen, 2112 Flag Ave. Changing speed limits won’t help. The current speed limit is
not enforced.
82.5/4: Kathryn Urich, 2208 Oregon Ct. I’m against speed limit changes. It won’t change driver
behavior. Local residential streets are fine with lower speed limits. Thru streets with lower speed
limits will cause congestion.
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 35
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 36
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 37
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 38
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 39
/
🙃
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 40
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 41
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 42
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 43
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 44
/
🙃
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 45
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 46
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 47
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 48
/
🤦
🙃🙃
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 49
/
🤦
🙃🙃
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 50
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 51
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 52
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 53
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 54
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 55
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 56
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 57
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 58
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 59
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 60
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 61
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 62
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 63
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 64
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 65
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 66
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 67
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 68
5/10/2021
/
⇩
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 69
5/10/2021
/
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 70
Speed limits social media campaign – Nextdoor posts and comments
March 31
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 71
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 72
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 73
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 74
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 75
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 76
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 77
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 78
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 79
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 80
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 81
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 82
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 83
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 84
April 7
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 85
April 14
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 86
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 87
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 88
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 89
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 90
April 21
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 91
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 92
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 93
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 94
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 95
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 1)
Title: Citywide speed limit evaluation update Page 96
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: May 24, 2021
Discussion item: 2
Executive summary
Title: Semi-trailer truck parking
Recommended action: No formal action at this time. This topic was proposed by a
councilmember for a future study session discussion.
Policy consideration: What direction does the council wish to provide staff on this matter?
Summary: On March 22 councilmember Rog presented to council a proposal to discuss semi-
trailer truck parking in the community (please see attached). At that time the council agreed to
have such a discussion at a future meeting. The council has not yet had an opportunity to
prioritize this topic. Given the increasing number of complaints the city is receiving regarding
this matter I felt it timely to place this item on the agenda.
At the study session staff will provide a recommendation on an option for moving forward.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable
Strategic priority consideration: Councilmember Rog identified three strategic priorities as
being aligned with this topic: race equity, environmental stewardship, and community mobility.
Supporting documents: Study session topic proposal
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Semi-trailer truck parking
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: May 24, 2021
Discussion item: 3
Executive summary
Title: Future study session agenda planning and prioritization
Recommended action: The city council and city manager to set the agenda for the special study
session scheduled for June 7, 2021 and the regularly scheduled study session on June 14, 2021.
Policy consideration: Not applicable.
Summary: This report summarizes the proposed agenda for the special study session scheduled
for June 7, 2021 and the regularly scheduled study session on June 14, 2021. 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 – June 7 and June 14, 2021
Study session discussion topics and timeline
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, administrative services office assistant
Reviewed by: Maria Solano, interim administrative services officer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Future study session agenda planning and prioritization
June 7, 2021.
Immediately following city council meeting
Special study session – council chambers (if needed)
Tentative discussion items
1.Review city manager finalist interviews – administrative services (60 minutes)
This meeting will provide time for council to review the data gathered at the June 4 and 5
interviews and make a determination on a top candidate for conditional offer. Meeting will
only be necessary if a decision is not made on June 5.
June 14, 2021.
6:30 p.m. Study Session – council chambers
Tentative discussion items
1.Community technology advisory commission smart cities initiative – part 2 and workplan
review – information resources (60 minutes)
Smart cities initiative and annual workplan update from the community technology advisory
commission.
2.Police advisory commission workplan review – Police (30 minutes)
Annual workplan update from the police advisory commission.
3.Financial overview – administrative services (60 minutes)
Discussion of 2020 fund balance allocations, additional funding sources, and pavement
management/Connect the Park expenditures
4.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
5.Housing authority workplan review
6.Beltline Station (Sherman) update
7.Beltline Station (Sherman) TIF request, preliminary development extension
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 3) 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
discussion
1 Council meetings – agenda and video
presentation TBD
3 Public process expectations and
outcomes
Staff is working on the approach for
undertaking this discussion. 8/23/21
5 Community and neighborhood sidewalk
designations
To be combined w/ Connect the Park
discussion. 3rd qtr. 2021
6 Transportation commission 9/27/21
7
Easy access to nature, across city,
starting w/ low-income neighborhoods/
WHNC Access Fund
*On hold pending direction from school
district.*On hold
9 Public forums at council mtgs 9/23/19 SS. Staff is researching options. 3rd qtr. 2021
11 STEP discussion: facilities STEP has entered into purchase
agreement for two adjacent properties. On hold
+ Vehicle idling ESC is reviewing and will provide
recommendation TBD
+ Semi-trailer truck parking Council discussion upcoming 5/24/21
+ Land acknowledgements TBD
Council items in progress
Priority Discussion topic Comments Next Steps
- Policing discussion Discussed 7/27/20, 9/29/20 & 2/22/21. TBD
2 Inclusionary housing policy – requiring
family size units Written report to council 5/10/21 6/7/21 approve
amendment
4 Creating pathways to home ownership
for BIPOC individuals and families Discussed at 2/8/21 council meeting.
Program being developed.
6/28/21
discussion
10 Boards and commissions general review Discussed 1/25/21. Revisit after the
annual workplan process. 3rd qtr. 2021
- Conversion therapy ban
Report on 2/22/21. Resolution adopted
3/15/21. HRC to review and make
recommendations on ordinance.
TBD
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: May 24, 2021
Written report: 4
Executive summary
Title: Update on SWLRT Community Works PLACES art initiative
Recommended action: None currently. This report is provided as an update and background.
Policy consideration: Does the council wish to continue to pursue temporary and permanent
art in the LRT station areas?
Summary: PLACES (public art and community engagement Southwest) was created in 2015 by
Hennepin County SWLRT Community Works to facilitate public art along SWLRT after funding
for public art was removed from the SWLRT project. The effort is overseen by a steering
committee and has representatives from the SWLRT cities, Hennepin County, Metropolitan
Council, and the arts community.
In the past year, PLACES has been working toward a strategy for both short term and long-
term art along the corridor. An Artist Fellow, Taylan De Johnette, was hired and has developed
a branding scheme for the effort. She is working with the staff of the cities to plan and
schedule pop-up art events in 2021, with the intent of building awareness around the longer-
term strategy for public art along the SWLRT corridor.
Staff from the cities suggested a traveling “pop-up” event that all the cities could use. The
intent is to pair it with one or more planned events in each community to build on the existing
audience at such events. In St. Louis Park, the Arts and Crafts Fair which is scheduled for
Saturday, September 11th at the ROC, is an event that would pair well with the pop-up event.
Financial or budget considerations: The Artist Fellow, pop-up events, and Forecast Public Art
have limited funding and is expected to last part way through 2021. Additional temporary and
permanent projects as well as the consulting effort will need additional funds that have not
been identified.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Draft branding
Prepared by: Meg McMonigal, principal planner
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 4) Page 2
Title: Update on SWLRT Community Works PLACES art initiative
Discussion
Background: PLACES (Public Art and Community Engagement Southwest) was created in 2015
by Hennepin County SWLRT Community Works to facilitate public art along SWLRT after
funding for public art was removed from the SWLRT project. A Steering Committee oversees
the effort and has representatives from the SWLRT cities (excepting Minneapolis), Hennepin
County, Metropolitan Council and the arts community. Forecast Public Art has been the
consultant for the effort. The Steering Committee adopted a charter in 2020.
PLACES has the following goals for public art in the SWLRT corridor:
• Raise awareness, generate interest and enthusiasm amongst civic leaders, philanthropy,
businesses, and landowners along the SWRLT corridor, and create opportunities to build
identity and a sense of belonging among community members.
• Create a unifying image for the corridor while emphasizing the unique nature of each city.
• Strengthen the opportunity for local artists to participate in PLACES. Raise community
awareness of the role artists can play—artists from diverse backgrounds, disciplines, and
ethnicities.
• Amplify the rich cultural heritage of communities along the corridor.
• Support the SWLRT Project Office communications team’s effort to generate positive
media attention around community-minded art as part of SWLRT in outside-the-box ways.
Funding considerations: The city, along with other cities and agencies, initially contributed
$5,000 each toward PLACES. In 2018 the process was reinvigorated when Forecast Public Art
received a $100,000 grant from the McKnight Foundation for this project. In 2019, the city (and
other agencies) contributed an additional $10,000 each to continue the PLACES work.
Additional funding will be needed to continue the consultant and artist work into the future.
This funding has not yet been identified.
Present considerations: Research and work on potential future public art sites has been
conducted. In 2020 an Artist Fellow was hired to develop a branding strategy and create pop-
up events to take place in the four cities along SWLRT. These events are anticipated to happen
in 2021.
PLACES
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
PLACES
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
PLACES
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
PLACES
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
PLACES
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
PLACES
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
PLACES
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 4)
Title: Update on SWLRT Community Works PLACES art initiative Page 3
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
Public Art Community Engagement Southwest
Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 4)
Title: Update on SWLRT Community Works PLACES art initiative Page 4
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: May 24, 2021
Written report: 5
Executive summary
Title: April 2021 monthly financial report
Recommended action: No action is required.
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: Expenditures should generally be at about 33% of the
annual budget at the end of April. General fund expenditures are under budget through April at
just over 30% of budget.
License and permit revenue is at 41% because over 90% of the 2021 license revenue has been
received. Permit revenue is at just under 29% of budget through April.
Most departments are under or at budget. Engineering has a variance due to a lesser portion of
staff hours allocated to projects prior to the start of the construction season.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Summary of revenues and departmental expenditures – general fund
Prepared by: Darla Monson, accountant
Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, city manager
Summary of Revenues & Departmental Expenditures - General Fund As of April 30, 2021 20212021201920192020202020212021Balance YTD Budget Budget Audited Budget Unaudited Budget YTD Apr Remaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes26,880,004$ 26,952,306$ 28,393,728$ 28,635,694$ 29,601,811$ -$29,601,811$ 0.00% Licenses and Permits4,103,424 5,264,659 4,660,811 5,294,310 4,621,829 1,906,182 2,715,647 41.24% Fines & Forfeits279,700 274,340 280,000 126,192 231,000 45,469 185,531 19.68% Intergovernmental1,760,900 1,761,763 1,760,082 2,061,267 1,661,549 420,768 1,240,781 25.32% Charges for Services2,187,319 2,160,345 2,273,824 1,600,806 2,013,834 369,425 1,644,409 18.34% Rents & Other Miscellaneous1,367,012 1,500,867 1,456,102 1,201,119 1,499,091 486,583 1,012,508 32.46% Transfers In1,999,877 2,012,706 2,038,338 2,049,976 2,055,017 677,339 1,377,678 32.96% Investment Earnings 180,000 523,124 210,000 486,468 200,000 24,798 175,202 12.40% Other Income31,300 57,274 621,280 3,442,900 593,300 200,595 392,705 33.81% Use of Fund Balance298,156 230,026 25,000 25,000 0.00%Total General Fund Revenues39,087,692$ 40,737,411$ 41,694,165$ 44,898,732$ 42,502,431$ 4,131,158$ 38,371,273$ 9.72%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration1,837,620$ 1,673,619$ 1,868,599$ 1,472,421$ 1,842,882$ 401,802$ 1,441,080$ 21.80% Finance1,034,199 1,078,291 1,124,045 1,194,828 1,129,591 339,890 789,701 30.09% Assessing772,746 751,737 808,171 792,277 798,244 265,063 533,181 33.21% Human Resources805,620 756,767 823,209 796,088 837,736 264,906 572,830 31.62% Community Development1,502,521 1,515,672 1,571,894 1,536,657 1,576,323 501,733 1,074,590 31.83% Facilities Maintenance1,170,211 1,209,474 1,265,337 1,246,439 1,349,365 401,460 947,905 29.75% Information Resources1,674,937 1,474,604 1,709,255 1,596,487 1,683,216 572,874 1,110,342 34.03% Communications & Marketing805,674 786,448 828,004 710,334 970,934 245,196 725,738 25.25%Total General Government9,603,528$ 9,246,612$ 9,998,514$ 9,345,531$ 10,188,291$ 2,992,923$ 7,195,368$ 29.38% Public Safety: Police10,335,497$ 10,452,038$ 10,853,821$ 10,611,141$ 11,307,863$ 3,809,144$ 7,498,719$ 33.69% Fire Protection4,813,078 4,754,524 5,040,703 4,764,337 4,998,636 1,636,253 3,362,383 32.73% Building 2,555,335 2,430,473 2,696,585 2,321,664 2,571,968 767,332 1,804,636 29.83%Total Public Safety17,703,910$ 17,637,035$ 18,591,109$ 17,697,142$ 18,878,467$ 6,212,728$ 12,665,739$ 32.91% Operations: Public Works Administration290,753$ 214,436$ 273,318$ 216,899$ 249,256$ 66,099$ 183,157$ 26.52% Public Works Operations3,111,481 3,099,493 3,331,966 3,168,538 3,285,820 953,057 2,332,763 29.01% Vehicle Maintenance1,242,236 1,268,700 1,278,827 1,207,998 1,303,159 388,193 914,966 29.79% Engineering570,377 609,567 551,285 531,801 523,547 210,301 313,246 40.17%Total Operations5,214,847$ 5,192,196$ 5,435,396$ 5,125,236$ 5,361,782$ 1,617,650$ 3,744,132$ 30.17% Parks and Recreation: Organized Recreation1,579,569 1,498,462 1,637,002 1,369,309 1,639,358 535,392 1,103,966 32.66% Recreation Center1,949,657 2,041,386 2,061,394 1,864,459 2,082,697 504,464 1,578,233 24.22% Park Maintenance1,833,297 1,820,455 1,906,363 1,802,534 1,916,643 534,341 1,382,302 27.88% Westwood Nature Center643,750 612,266 748,683 606,378 736,515 201,723 534,792 27.39% Natural Resources484,784 429,409 504,143 433,362 496,497 42,101 454,396 8.48%Total Parks and Recreation6,491,057$ 6,401,977$ 6,857,585$ 6,076,042$ 6,871,710$ 1,818,020$ 5,053,690$ 26.46% Other Depts and Non-Departmental: Racial Equity and Inclusion -$4,592$ 314,077$ 272,994$ 341,293$ 86,085$ 255,208$ 25.22% Sustainability26,283 497,484 244,655 432,043 91,582 340,461 21.20% Transfers Out300,000 428,845 0.00% Contingency and Other74,350 121,245 144,860 0.00%Total Other Depts and Non-Departmental74,350$ 452,119$ 811,561$ 662,509$ 1,202,181$ 177,667$ 595,669$ 14.78%Total General Fund Expenditures39,087,692$ 38,929,940$ 41,694,165$ 38,906,460$ 42,502,431$ 12,818,988$ 29,254,598$ 30.16%Page 2Study session meeting of May 24, 2021 (Item No. 5) Title: April 2021 monthly financial report