Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2021/09/20 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular
AGENDA SEPT. 20, 2021 The St. Louis Park City Council is meeting in person at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. in accordance with the most recent COVID-19 guidelines. Members of the public can attend the council meeting in person or watch the meeting by webstream at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil and on local cable (Comcast SD channel 17 and HD channel 859). Visit bit.ly/slpccagendas to view the agenda and reports. EDA 5:45 p.m.; Regular city council meeting at 6:30 p.m. – community room (1st floor) Members of the public who want to provide comment to the city council about items on the agenda may attend the meeting in person or email comments to info@stlouispark.org by 3:30 p.m. the day of the meeting. Emailed comments will be provided to the city council at the meeting and be included in the official meeting record. 5:45 p.m. Economic development authority 1.Call to order 2.Roll call 3.Approval of minutes 3a. EDA minutes of Aug. 16, 2021 4.Approval of agenda and items on EDA consent calendar Recommended action:**Motion to approve the agenda as presented and items listed on the consent calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from agenda, or move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion.) 4a. Accept for filing EDA disbursement claims for the period of July 24 through Aug. 27, 2021. 4b. Adopt EDA Resolution supporting submission of a grant application to the Hennepin County Minnesota Brownfields Gap Financing Program relative to the Union Park Flats development. 7.New business 7a. 2022 preliminary HRA Levy certification Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the 2022 Preliminary HRA levy. 7b. 2022 preliminary EDA Levy certification Recommended action: Motion to recommend adoption of the 2022 Preliminary EDA levy by the city council. 7c. Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Recommended action: •Motion to adopt EDA Resolution approving the establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District (a redevelopment district). •Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing an Interfund Loan for advance of certain costs in connection with the administration of the Beltline Residences TIF District. 7d. Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution approving the redevelopment contract between the EDA and Beltline Residences, LLC. Meeting of Sept. 20, 2021 City council agenda 6:30 p.m. City council meeting 1. Call to order 1a. Pledge of allegiance 1b. Roll call 2. Presentations 2a. Proclamation honoring Friends of the Arts Executive Director Jamie Marshall 3. Approval of minutes 3a. Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 3b. Study session minutes of July 26, 2021 3c. City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 3d. City council meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 3e. Special study session minutes of August 16, 2021 3f. Special city council meeting minutes of August 23, 2021 3g. Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar Recommended action: **Motion to approve the agenda as presented and items listed on the consent calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, or move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion.) 4a. Accept for filing city disbursement claims for the period of July 24 through Aug. 27, 2021. 4b. Adopt Resolution appointing election workers for the November 2, 2021 municipal and school district general election. 4c. Authorize execution of a contract amendment to a professional services contract with Bolton and Menk, Inc. in the amount of $598,297 for the 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue Improvements – City project 4022-6000. 4d. Approve the second reading of all five ordinances amending various sections of chapters 6 and 8 of the city code, establishing fees, and approve summary ordinances for publication. 4e. Adopt Resolution approving special legislation relating to the transfer of pooled tax increment into the city’s affordable housing trust fund. 4f. Approve Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19, between the city and Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, for communication antennas and related equipment on the city’s water tower at 2541 Nevada Ave S. 4g. Adopt Resolution authorizing removal of stop signs on 25th Street and Boone Avenue and rescinding Resolution 6079. 4h. Adopt Resolution authorizing removal of parking restrictions on Walker Street and rescinding Resolution 10-136. 4i. Adopt Resolution authorizing parking restrictions on 41st Street. 4j. Adopt Resolution authorizing truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road. 4k. Adopt Resolution authorizing truck parking restrictions on the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road from Monterey Avenue to France Avenue. 4l. Adopt Resolution removing permit parking restrictions at 2817 Brunswick Avenue. Meeting of Sept. 20, 2021 City council agenda 4m. Adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of $175,231.95 for the sanitary sewer mainline rehabilitation project with Hydro-Klean, LLC - city contract No. 14-21. 4n. Authorize the mayor and city manager to execute the Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Edina for speed limits on shared local streets. 4o. Adopt Resolution accepting the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund established under the American Rescue Plan Act. 4p. Adopt Resolution approving Community Charities of Minnesota to conduct off-site gambling on September 25, 2021 at the St. Louis Park ROC, 3700 Monterey Drive. 4q. Approve for filing planning commission minutes of Aug. 4, 2021 4r. Approve for filing fire civil service commission minutes of May 18, 2021. 5.Boards and commissions – None 6.Public hearings 6a. New Punch Bowl Minneapolis, LLC dba Punch Bowl Social - on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor license Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close public hearing. Motion to approve application from New Punch Bowl Minneapolis, LLC dba Punch Bowl Social for an on-sale intoxicating and on-sale Sunday liquor license located at 1691 Park Place Blvd. 6b. Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take testimony, and then close the public hearing. Motion to adopt Resolution approving the establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District (a redevelopment district). (The EDA will have considered establishment of the Beltline Residences TIF District earlier in the evening.) 7.Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – None 8.Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items 8a. 2022 preliminary HRA levy certification Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the 2022 Preliminary HRA Levy. 8b. 2022 preliminary EDA levy certification Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the 2022 Preliminary EDA Levy. 8c. 2022 preliminary property tax levy certification Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving 2022 preliminary property tax levy and setting budget public hearing date for December 6, 2021. 8d. Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Recommended action: •Motion to adopt Resolution approving the amendment to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, as well as related figures, tables and text. •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance amending the zoning map from C-1 neighborhood commercial and R-3 two-family residence to R-4 multiple family residence and set the second reading for October 4, 2021. Meeting of Sept. 20, 2021 City council agenda 8e. Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Recommended action: • Motion to adopt Resolution approving the preliminary and final plat for Belt Line Industrial Park 3rd Addition (requires four affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance adding section 36-268-PUD 21 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from MX-1 vertical mixed-use to PUD 21 and set the second reading for October 4, 2021 (requires five affirmative votes). 9. Communications – None **NOTE: The consent calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a councilmember or a member of the public, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular city council meetings are carried live on civic TV cable channel 17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and saved for video on demand replays. During the COVID-19 pandemic, agendas will be posted on Fridays on the entrance doors to city hall and on the text display on civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available after noon on Friday on the city’s website. If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952.924.2525. Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Minutes: 3a Unofficial minutes EDA meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota Aug. 16, 2021 1. Call to order President Brausen called the meeting to order at 6:20 p.m. 2. Roll call Commissioners present: President Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, Margaret Rog, and Jake Spano Commissioners absent: none Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), Park and Recreation Director (Ms. Walsh), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Community Development Director/EDA Executive Director (Ms. Barton), Communications and Marketing Manager (Ms. Smith) 3. Approval of minutes 3a. EDA minutes of July 6, 2021 It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Co mmissioner Rog, to approve the July 6, 2021, EDA minutes as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 3b. EDA minutes of Aug 2, 2021 It was moved by Commissioner Rog, seconded by Commissioner Kraft, to approve the Aug. 2, 2021, EDA minutes as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 4. Approval of agenda and items on EDA consent calendar 4a. Adopt EDA Resolution No. 21-15 approving the Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Millennium Phase II and GS-INVREG Wayzata Owner, LLC 4b. Adopt EDA Resolution No. 21-16 approving the Sixth Amendment to the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Contract related to The West End/Central Park West 4c. Adopt EDA Resolution No. 21-17, EDA Resolution No. 21-18, EDA Resolution No. 21-19, EDA Resolution No. 21-20 authorizing submission of Livable Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Title: EDA meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) grant applications to Metropolitan Council for Beltline Blvd Station redevelopment project, Wooddale Station redevelopment project, Minnetonka Blvd redevelopment project, and Beltline Residences project 4d. Adopt EDA Resolution No. 21-21 authorizing bank signatories for the Economic Development Authority It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Harris, to approve the EDA agenda as presented and the items on the consent calendar. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Reports - none 6. Old business - none 7. New business - none 8. Communications – none 9. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, secretary Tim Brausen, president Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4a Executive summary Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Recommended action: Motion to accept for filing EDA disbursement claims for the period of July 24 through Aug 27, 2021. Policy consideration: Does the EDA desire to approve EDA disbursements in accordance with Article V – Administ ration of Finances, of the EDA bylaws? Summary: The finance division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the EDA to review and approve. The attached reports show both EDA disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable. Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of the information follows the EDA ’s charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: EDA disbursements Prepared by: Kari Mahan, accounting clerk Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, chief f inancial officer Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:18:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 288,103.434800 EXCELSIOR APARTMENTS LLC 4900 EXC BLVD TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT 288,103.43 1,297.89BARKER, JOEL DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MISC EXPENSE 1,297.89 951,596.00BRIDGEWATER BANK BRIDGEWATER BK TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT 951,596.00 247.50CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES 247.50 5,617.92CKJ PROPERTIES DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MISC EXPENSE 5,617.92 287,120.59CP4 7201 WALKER, LLC MILL CITY G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT 287,120.59 1,352,789.87DUKE REALTY WEST END TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT 1,352,789.87 663.75EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 4900 EXC BLVD TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00ELIOT PARK TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,430.00WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00ELLIPSE ON EXC TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00PARK CENTER HOUSING G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 665.00CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,143.75DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 665.00MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 665.00PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00ELMWOOD VILLAGE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00WOLFE LAKE COMMERCIAL TIF G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00SHOREHAM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 260.00AQUILA COMMONS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 665.00HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,717.50 1,642.50FUNCTIONAL TRAINING LLC.DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,642.50 728,755.02GOTTMAR II LLC PARK COMMONS G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Page 2 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:18:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 728,755.02 764,731.44GOTTMAR LLC PARK COMMONS G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT 764,731.44 70,247.07HIGHWAY 7 BUSINESS CENTER LLC HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT 70,247.07 1,783.90IMAGE 360 CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,783.90 3,199.00JOHNSON SPENCER DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MISC EXPENSE 3,199.00 357.00KENNEDY & GRAVEN MTKA BLVD PROPERTIES LEGAL SERVICES 126.006211 CEDAR LK RD (DAHL PROP)LEGAL SERVICES 72.00WEST END TIF DIST G&A LEGAL SERVICES 840.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES 1,395.00 195,928.88MMP HS OPCO CSM TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT 195,928.88 45,190.38MMP PT OPCO CSM TIF DIST G&A DEVELOPER TAX INCREMNT PYMT 45,190.38 809.52MURRAY DANIEL DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MISC EXPENSE 809.52 3,000.00PRIMACY STRATEGY GROUP LLC.DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES 3,000.00 884.20REISS JUDY DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MISC EXPENSE 884.20 1,748.64ROYCE JEFFREY DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MISC EXPENSE 1,748.64 1,300.20SCHROECKENTHALER KYLE DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MISC EXPENSE 1,300.20 Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Page 3 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:18:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 3Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 765.60SCHULZ JONATHAN DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A MISC EXPENSE 765.60 56,593.05ST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS BUREAU CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-CVB 56,593.05 20,000.00ST LOUIS PARK FRIENDS OF THE ARTS PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 20,000.00 1,437.27WALKER DISPLAY, INC.CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,437.27 99.90WHIPPER SNAPPER LAWN SERVICE 7015 WALKER-RYNLDS WELDING LAND MAINTENANCE 249.76BELTLINE SWLRT DEVELOPMENT LAND MAINTENANCE 199.80MTKA BLVD PROPERTIES LAND MAINTENANCE 147.86HWY 7 & LOUISIANA LAND MAINTENANCE 697.32 Report Totals 4,794,599.69 Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Page 4 Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4b Executive summary Title: Authorization of environmental cleanup grant application – Union Park Flats Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution supporting submission of a grant application to the Hennepin County Minnesota Brownfields Gap Financing Program relative to the Union Park Flats development. Policy consideration: Does the EDA support the submission of a grant application to the Hennepin County Minnesota Brownfields program to facilitate the Union Park Flats affordable housing project? Summary: On July 6, 2020, the City Council approved a planned unit development (PUD) for Project for Pride in Living’s (PPL’s) Union Park Flats redevelopment project, a 60-unit, three- story, 100 percent affordable apartment development on property located at 6027 West 37th Street and 3700 Alabama Avenue. PPL is currently seeking financing from several public agencies for its proposed affordable housing development and has also applied for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance to address the remaining funding gap. PPL has requested the EDA approve a resolution in support of its application for funding through the Minnesota Brownfields Gap Funding Program. This funding will be used to conduct a supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Analysis and update the Response Action Plan (RAP ). Updating of the RAP is necessary to reflect new findings and prepare the project for potential cleanup grant applications in the coming months. This funding will not exceed $15,000. Th e Program requires a resolution in support of PPL’s application from the governing body of the city where the project is located. Financial or budget considerations: PPL is the grant applicant for the Minnesota Brownfields grant and PPL will work directly with Hennepin County to administer the grant. Once PPL receives commitments from other funders, and its need for financial assistance is further refined, staff will work with PPL on its formal request for TIF assistance. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: EDA resolution Prepared by: Julie Grove, community and e conomic development analyst; Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, e conomic development manager Karen Barton, community development director, EDA executive director Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh , interim deputy city manager Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 Title: Authorization of environmental cleanup grant application – Union Park Flats EDA Resolution No. 21- ____ Resolution supporting an application by Union Park Flats to the Minnesota Brownfields’ Brownfield Gap Financing program Whereas, the Brownfield Gap Financing Program provides small grants to nonprofits for environmental assessment and clean-up of property in Hennepin County through funding from Hennepin County’s Environmental Response Fund from Hennepin County Department of Environmental Services; and Whereas, Minnesota Brownfields, a 501 (c)(3) non-profit organization, is the administrator of the Brownfield Gap Financing Program; and Whereas, Brownfield Gap Financing Program projects benefit the community through the development or clean-up of greenspace, recreation centers, affordable housing, education centers, community cen ters, and neighborhood level economic development opportunities. Whereas, the city council voted on July 6, 2020, to approved Ordinance No. 2588-20 creating a Planned Unit Development Zoning District for the Union Parks Flats project located at 3700 Alabama Avenue South and 6027 37th Street West. Now therefore be it resolved that, the St. Louis Park EDA supports the Union Park Flats project’s application to Minnesota Brownfields for funding through the Brownfields Gap Funding Program. This application is being submitted to Minnesota Brownfields by Project for Pride in Living. I certify that the above resolution was adopted by the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority on, September 20, 2021. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority September 20, 2021 Kare n Barton , executive director Tim Brausen, president Attest Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item: 7a Executive summary Title: 2022 preliminary HRA Levy certification Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing the 2022 Preliminary HRA levy. Policy consideration: Does the EDA desire to approve as a preliminary levy the full 0.0185% of estimated market value allowable for HRA purposes of $1,517,799. Summary: The HRA levy was originally implemented in St. Louis Park due to legislative changes in 2001 which significantly reduced future tax increment revenues. The City Council elected at that time to use the levy proceeds for future infrastructure improvements in redevelopment areas. By law, these funds could also be used for other housing and redevelopment purposes. Given the councils desire for housing related activities, staff recommends the HRA Levy continue at the maximum allowed by law for the 2022 budget year. The HRA Levy cannot exceed 0.0185% of the estimated market value of the City. Therefore, staff has calculated the maximum HRA Levy for 2022 to be $1,517,799 based on valuation data from Hennepin County which is an increase of $80,619 from 2021. The EDA is allowed to authorize the HRA levy and then forward this recommendation to the city council. Council action is required before certification. All special taxing districts levies must be certified to the county auditor by September 30th. Financial or budget considerations: The proposed levy is $1,517,799 for taxes payable 2022. Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget. •St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. •St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood- oriented development. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. •St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: EDA resolution Prepared by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7a) Page 2 Title: 2022 preliminary HRA Levy certification EDA Resolution No. 21-____ Authorizing the proposed levy of a special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.033, subdivision 6 Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA Act”), the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "Authority"); and Whereas, pursuant to the EDA Act, the city council granted to the Authority all of the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and Whereas, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, of the HRA Act permits the Authority to levy and collect a special benefit levy of up to 0.0185 percent of estimated market value in the city upon all taxable real property within the city; and Whereas, the Authority desires to levy a special benefit levy in the amount of up to 0.0185 percent of estimated market value in the city for taxes payable in 2022; and Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.065, the Authority is required to adopt a proposed budget and a proposed tax levy and submit the same to the County Auditor by September 30; and Now therefore be it resolved, be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority: 1.The proposed budget of $1,517,799 for the operations of the Authority in fiscal year 2022, as presented for consideration by the city council, is hereby in all respects approved, subject to final approval by the Authority before certification of the tax levy under Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.07. 2.Staff of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to file the proposed budget with the city in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6. 3.The proposed special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, is hereby approved in a maximum amount equal to 0.0185 percent of estimated market value in City of St. Louis Park, currently estimated to be $8,204,317,100, with respect to taxes payable in calendar year 2022, subject to final approval by the Authority before certification of the special benefit levy pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 275.07. 4.Staff of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to seek the approval by resolution of the city council of the levy of special benefit taxes payable in 2022 and to take such other actions as are necessary to bring before the Board the final budget and levy to be sent to the county auditor on or before five working days after December 21, 2020. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7a) Page 3 Title: 2022 preliminary HRA Levy certification Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority, September 20, 2021 Karen Barton, executive director Tim Brausen, president Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item: 7b Executive summary Title: 2022 preliminary EDA Levy certification Recommended action: Motion to recommend adoption of the 2022 Preliminary EDA levy by the city council. Policy consideration: Does the EDA desire to approve as a preliminary levy 0.00610% of estimated market value allowable for EDA purposes (or $500,000)? Summary: An EDA levy in the amount of $500,000 or approximately .00610% of estimated market value is being proposed for 2022. Creation of an EDA levy is being proposed for two purposes. Funding for salaries in the development fund and funding for the Climate investment projects. The development fund preliminary budget for 2022 is as follows: Revenue $10,567,730 Expense $ 5,579,033 Much of the revenue being budgeted in 2022 (around $8.9 million) is for anticipated property sales of Beltline station and Wooddale station sites. These may not sell in 2022 leaving a deficit as is common in the development fund. Expenses include $1.5 million in potential property acquisition costs in 2022, also with no guarantee this money will be spent. Salaries make up around $750,000 each year. We pay for salaries out of the development fund for staff working on developments or programs within the fund, per government accounting best practices. The EDA Levy cannot exceed 0.01813% of the estimated market value of the City. The request for the EDA levy for 2022 is $500,000, or approximately .00610% of market value based on valuation data from Hennepin County. The EDA should approve a motion to recommend an EDA levy and then forward this recommendation to the city council. Council action is required before certification. All special taxing districts levies must be certified to the county auditor by Sept. 30, 2021. Financial or budget considerations: The proposed levy is $500,000 for taxes payable 2022. Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget. • St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. • St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. • St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood- oriented development. • St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. • St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item : 7c Executive summary Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Recommended action: •Motion to adopt EDA Resolution approving the establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District (a redevelopment district). •Motion to adopt EDA Resolution authorizing an Interfund Loan for advance of certain costs in connection with the administration of the Beltline Residences TIF District. Policy consideration: Does the EDA support establishment of a redevelopment TIF district to facilitate construction of proposed Beltline Residences mixed -use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development? Summary: A staff report regarding Beltline Residences, LLC’s (an affiliate of Opus Development and “Redeveloper”) application for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance in connection with its proposed Beltline Residences development was provided at the July 26, 2021 study session. As stated in the report, constructing the 250-unit mixed -use, mixed-income multifamily housing development is not financially feasible but for the use of the proposed tax increment assistance. Given subsequent EDA consensus support, the proposed financial assistance was advanced for formal approval. It is now time to take the final steps in the TIF process which is to formally authorize establishment of the redevelopment TIF district and approve the related redevelopment contract. Such authorizations enable the EDA to designate tax increment generated from the Beltline Residences development as partial reimbursement for certain qualified public redevelopment costs incurred in connection with construction of the project so as to make it financially feasible. Financial or budget considerations: Authorizing establishment of the Beltline Residences TIF District does not commit the city to any specific level of financial assistance for the proposed project. Procedurally, it simply creates the funding vehicle to reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of its qualified public redevelopment costs incurred in constructing the proposed development. The terms and amount of TIF assistance are specified within the redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC which is also scheduled for consideration by the EDA Sept. 20, 2021. In addition, an election was made in the proposed district’s TIF Plan to increase the pooling limitations, from 25% to 35%, for affordable housing activities located outside of the geographic area of the TIF District. This will allow the EDA to use more increment from the district for affordable housing initiatives within the city. Authorizing an Interfund Loan in the amount of $525,000 allows the EDA to recoup certain costs in connection with the administration of the new TIF District and installation of a future traffic signal at the adjacent Beltline Blvd/Par k Glen intersection. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion EDA resolution s - TIF district and Interfund Loan TIF Dis trict Overview Prepared by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director, EDA executive director Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh , interim deputy city manager Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Page 2 Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Discussion Background: Beltline Residences, LLC (an affiliate of Opus Development and “Redeveloper”) has a purchase agreement to acquire the nearly four-acre property located at 3440 Beltline Boulevard. The Redeveloper proposes to remove the structurally substandard, 58,000 square foot industrial building and construct a five story, 250-unit mixed-use building with approximately 7,445 square feet of commercial space and six live/work units on the ground floor fronting Beltline Boulevard. Due to high ground water and floodplain, parking will be provided in a three-story, above ground, 320-stall ramp and 32 surface parking stalls. Beltline Residences would be a mixed-income housing development with 25 (10 percent) of the units affordable at 50% of area median income (AMI), meeting the city’s inclusionary housing policy requirements. Several three-bedroom units would also be included in the building’s unit mix to assist the city’s goals for family -sized housing. Redeveloper’s request for public financing assistance and TIF Application review: The Redeveloper previously indicated that Beltline Residences’ financial proforma exhibited a gap preventing it from achieving a market rate of return sufficient to attract financing. To offset this gap, the Redeveloper applied to the EDA for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance. Ehlers, the EDA’s financial consultant, examined the project’s pro forma to determine what, if any, level of financial assistance was necessary for the project to become financially feasible. After review, Ehlers determined that up to $5.2 million in TIF assistance is warranted to enable the project to achieve a market rate of return and proceed. Such assistance would be provided via a pay-as- you-go TIF Note and would derive from the establishment of a new redevelopment TIF district. The EDA/city council received a staff report detailing the Redeveloper’s TIF Application at the July 26, 2021 study session along with the recommendation for the level of assistance for which there was consensus support. TIF District Overview and Plan: The attached Tax Increment Financing District Overview summarizes the basic elements of the proposed Beltline Residences TIF District (a redevelopment district). Additional details of the proposed TIF District may be found in the larger Beltline Residences TIF District Plan (available by contacting the Community Development Department). Both the Overview and TIF Plan were prepared by Ehlers. The specific mutual obligations between the EDA and the Redeveloper as well as the specific terms of the financial assistance are contained in the separate Redevelopment Contract between the parties. Both the TIF Plan and the Redevelopment Contract need to be approved for the proposed development to proceed. Synopsis of the proposed Beltline Residences TIF District: In order to provide the Redeveloper with the proposed tax increment, a new redevelopment TIF district needs to be established. The MN TIF Act requires that proposed TIF districts must be located within a city’s Redevelopment Project Area(s). The proposed Beltline Residences TIF District is located within the city’s Redevelopment Project Area, as required. The location of the proposed Beltline Residences TIF District is shown in the map below. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Page 3 Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Location of proposed Beltline Residences TIF District The entirety of the tax increment to be provided to the Redeveloper would be derived from the subject redevelopment site which constitutes the proposed redevelopment TIF district. The proposed TIF district includes a single parcel located at 3440 Beltline Boulevard along with adjacent roads and internal rights of -way . Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Page 4 Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Boundaries of proposed Beltline Residences TIF District Qualifications of the proposed TIF district: Beltline Residences, LLC has a purchase agreement to acquire the nearly four-acre property located at 3440 Beltline Boulevard. The Re developer proposes to remove the vacant, structurally substandard industrial building on the property and construct a five story, 250-unit mixed -use building with approximately 7,445 square feet of commercial space (for a possible restaurant and coffee shop) along with three -levels of above - ground structured parking. The tax increment to be provided to the proposed development would derive from a newly established redevelopment TIF district. Consulting firm LHB conducted a TIF district feasibility analysis and determined that the proposed TIF district for the Beltline Residences qualified as a redevelopment district under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. The MN TIF Act requires cities to determine if a proposed TIF district is in conformance with its city’s Comprehensive Plan. The current land use guidance for the subject redevelopment site within the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Plan is TOD – transit-oriented Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Page 5 Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District development. The density and mix of uses within the proposed Beltline Residences development meets the requirements for transit-oriented development land use. Therefore, in the proposed TIF district resolution of approval, there is a statement indicating that the city council finds the proposed Beltline Residences TIF District Plan conforms to the general plan for development of the city. Duration of the proposed TIF district: Under the MN TIF Act, the duration of redevelopment districts is up to 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the city (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The first tax increment for Beltline Residences is expected to be received in 2024. Thus, the full term of the district is estimated to terminate after 2049. The city’s expressed obligations to the Redeveloper, per the terms of the Redevelopment Contract, are estimated to be satisfied in approximately 8 years. Once those obligations are satisfied, the EDA and city will have the option to decertify the district or retain it to assist other redevelopment projects in the future. TIF district budget: The Beltline Residences TIF District Plan authorizes the use of tax increment funds generated by the ne w redevelopment TIF district to reimburse the Redeveloper for qualified Public Redevelopment Costs incurred in connection with the construction of the Beltline Residences. It should be noted that the Sources of Revenue and Uses of Funds within the TIF Plan is a not-to-exceed budget and not the actual expected project budget. The TIF Plan also authorizes the use of tax increment generated by the District to help pay for certain qualifying project expenses and capital improvements associated with the District (such as a traffic signal at the adjacent Beltline Boulevard/Park Glen intersection) should they be proven necessary. In addition, an election was made in the proposed district’s TIF Plan to increase the pooling limitations, from 25% to 35%, for affordable housing activities located outside of the geographic area of the TIF District. This will allow the EDA to use more increment from the district for affordable housing initiatives within the city. Recommendation: The EDA’s financial consultant, Ehlers, prepared the Beltline Residences TIF District Plan in consultation with the EDA’s legal counsel, Kennedy & Graven and staff; all of whom recommend approval of the establishment the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District and authorization of an Interfund Loan in connection with the administration of the new TIF District. Next steps: The redevelopment contract between the EDA and Beltline Residences, LLC which specifies the terms, conditions, and amount of TIF assistance related to the proposed Beltline Residences development is also scheduled for consideration by the EDA on September 20, 2021. Both the TIF Plan and the Redevelopment Contract need to be approved for the proposed development to proceed. Upon receiving such approvals and issuance of the building permit, the Redeveloper plans to commence demolition, environmental remediation and building construction by February 1, 2022. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Page 6 Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District EDA Resolution No. 21 - ____ Resolution approving a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District within the Redevelopment Project, and adopting a Tax Increment Financing Plan for the TIF District Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”) and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) have previously established Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Redevelopment Project”) within the City, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, as amended, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1081, as amended ; and Whereas, the City and the Authority have proposed to approve a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project (the “Plan Modification”) and a tax increment financing plan (the “TIF Plan”) for Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”), a redevelopment district, within the Redevelopment Project, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended (the “TIF Act”), all as described in a plan document presented to the Board on the date hereof.; and Whereas, pursuant to Section 469.175, subdivision 2 of the TIF Act, the proposed Plan Modification and TIF Plan and the estimates of the fiscal and economic implications of the TIF Plan were presented to the Board of Education of Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park Public Schools) and to the Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “County”) at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of publication of the notice of public hearing on establishment of the TIF District; and Whereas, immediately following the meeting of the Authority on the date hereof, the City Council will hold a duly noticed public hearing on the Plan Modification and establishment of the TIF District, and is expected to approve the creation of the TIF District and the associated TIF Plan following such public hearing. Now therefore, be it resolved as follows: 1. Subject to their approval by the City Council, the creation of the Plan Modification, the establishment of the TIF District, and the TIF Plan for the TIF District are hereby approved. 2. Authority staff is hereby authorized and directed to file a request for certification of the TIF District with the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of the County and to file a copy of the TIF Plan with the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor as required by the TIF Act. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Page 7 Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District 3. The Taxpayer Services Division Manager of the County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the TIF District, as described in the TIF Plan, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by which the original net tax capacity has increased or decreased. 4. Authority staff, consultants, and legal counsel are authorized to take all actions necessary to implement the TIF Plan and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to the Board for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents, and contracts necessary for this purpose. Approval of the TIF Plan does not constitute approval of any project or a development agreement with any developer. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority September 20, 2021 Karen Barton, executive director Tim Brausen, president Attest: Melissa Kennedy, clerk Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Page 8 Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District EDA Resolution No. 21 - ____ Resolution authorizing an Interfund Loan for advance of c ertain costs in connection with the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District Whereas, the City Council for the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "City"), intends to establish the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF District") within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project"), and will adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project; and Whereas, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) has determined to use tax increments from the TIF District to pay for certain administrative and public infrastructure costs identified in the TIF Plan, including without limitation the installation of a traffic signal adjacent to the proposed improvements within the TIF District (the "Qualified Costs"), which costs may be financed on a temporary basis from Authority funds available for such purposes; and Whereas, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, the Authority is authorized to advance or loan money from the Authority's general fund or any other fund from which such advances may be legally authorized, in order to finance the Qualified Costs; and Whereas, the Authority intends to reimburse itself for the Qualified Costs from tax increments derived from the TIF District in accordance with the terms of this resolution (which terms are referred to collectively as the "Interfund Loan"). Now Therefore Be It Resolved as follows: 1.The Authority hereby authorizes the advance of up to $525,000 from any legally authorized Authority fund or so much thereof as may be paid as Qualified Costs. The Authority shall reimburse itself for such advances together with interest at the rate stated below. Interest accrues on the principal amount from the date of each advance. The maximum rate of interest permitted to be charged is limited to the greater of the rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 as o f the date the loan or advance is authorized, unless the written agreement states that the maximum interest rate will fluctuate as the interest rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 are from time to time adjusted. The interest rate shall be 4% and will not fluctuate. 2.Principal and interest ("Payments") on the Interfund Loan shall be paid semi-annually on each August 1 and February 1 (each a "Payment Date"), commencing on the first Payment Date on which the Authority has Available Tax Increment (defined below), or on any other dates determined by the Executive Director of the Authority, through the date of last receipt of tax increment from the TIF District. 3.Payments on this Interfund Loan are payable solely from "Available Tax Increment," Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Page 9 Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District which shall mean, on each Payment Date, tax increment available after other obligations have been paid, or as determined by the Executive Director of the Authority, generated in the preceding six (6) months with respect to the property within the TIF District and remitted to the City by Hennepin County, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended. Payments on this Interfund Loan may be subordinated to any outstanding or future bonds, notes or contracts secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment, and are on parity with any other outstanding or future interfund loans secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment. 4.The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Interfund Loan are pre- payable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular payment otherwise required to be made under this Interfund Loan. 5.This Interfund Loan is evidence of an internal borrowing by the Authority in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, and is a limited obligation payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under this resolution. This Interfund Loan and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the Authority. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay any principal amount of the Interfund Loan or accrued interest thereon, which may remain unpaid after the final Payment Date. 6.The Authority may amend the terms of this Interfund Loan at any time by resolution of the Board, including a determination to forgive the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest to the extent permissible under law. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority September 20, 2021 Karen Barton, executive director Tim Brausen, president Attest: Melissa Kennedy, clerk • • Page 10 Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District • • • • Page 11 Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Page 12 Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Page 13 Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7c ) Title: Establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item: 7d Executive summary Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences , LLC Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution approving the redevelopment contract between the EDA and Beltline Residences, LLC. Policy consideration: Does the EDA wish to approve the proposed redevelopment contract with an affiliate of Opus Development to facilitate it s proposed Beltline Residences project? Summary: Beltline Residences, LLC (an affiliate of Opus Development and “Redeveloper”) has a purchase agreement to acquire 3440 Beltline Boulevard. The Redeveloper plans to remove the structurally substandard, 58,000 square foot office/industrial building on the property and construct a five story, 250-unit mixed-use building with approximately 7,445 square feet of commercial space and six live/work units on the ground floor fronting Beltline Boulevard along with a three -story, above ground, 320-stall ramp, and surface parking. The proposed $78 million development includes a mix of studios, one -, two-and three -bedroom units, including six live/work units located on the ground floor fronting Beltline Blvd. The development would be mixed-income with 25 (10 percent) of the apartment units affordable to households at 50 percent area median income (AMI) for 25 years , meeting the city’s inclusionary housing policy requirements in effect at the time of its planning applications. The Redeveloper also plans to include three three -bedroom units in the building’s unit mix, the majority of which would be affordable, to further the city’s goals for family-sized housing. For the development to achieve a market rate of return and attract private financing, the Redeveloper applied to the EDA for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance. The EDA/city council received a staff report detailing the Redeveloper’s TIF Application at the July 26, 2021 study session along with a recommendation for the appropriate level of financial assistance. Key business terms for provision of the proposed assistance were provided in the Aug. 23, 2021 study session s taff report . Financial or budget considerations: Under the proposed redevelopment contract, the Redeveloper agrees to construct the proposed Beltline Residences development as specified under the PUD approved July 6, 2021. The EDA agrees to reimburse the Redeveloper for qualified Public Redevelopment Costs in connection with the project up to $5.2 million in pay -as - you-go tax increment generated by the development upon its completion. It is estimated that a TIF Note in th at amount would be paid off in approximately eight years (on a net present value basis). Such assistance would derive from the establishment of a new redevelopment TIF district. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion EDA resolution Prepared by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development, director EDA executive director Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh , interim deputy city manager Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 2 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC Discussion Background: Beltline Residences, LLC (an affiliate of Opus Development, Opus Holding, LLC and “Redeveloper”) has a purchase agreement to acquire 3440 Beltline Boulevard. The Redeveloper plans to remove the structurally substandard, 58,000 square foot office/industrial building on the property and construct a five story, 250-unit mixed -use building with approximately 7,445 square feet of commercial space and six live/work units on the ground floor fronting Beltline Boulevard. Due to the property’s high ground water and floodplain, parking will be provided in a three -story, above ground, 320-stall ramp and approximately 32 surface parking stalls. The proposed $78 million development includes a mix of studios, one -, two-and three -bedroom units, including six live/work units located on the ground floor fronting Beltline Boulevard. The development’s proposed mix of unit types is as follows: Unit Type Summary Building Studio 1-bed 2-bed 3-bed Live/work TOTALS Market rate 62 126 31 1 5 225 Affordable 5 14 3 2 1 25 Total 67 140 34 3 6 250 Inclusionary housing policy: The Redeveloper proposes 25 (10 percent) of the apartment units within the development would be affordable to households at 50 percent area median income (AMI), which met the city’s inclusionary housing policy requirements in effect at the time of its planning applications. The Redeveloper also plans to include three three -bedroom units in the building’s unit mix, the majority of which would be affordable, to further the city’s goals for family -sized housing. G reen building policy: The Redeveloper plans to design Beltline Residences to LEED, B3 guidelines or another similar certification in its construction and operation. Sustainability features in the development include : rooftop photovoltaic solar array , all-electric vehicle charging stations, LED lighting, low VOC materials, construction waste recycling, higher efficiency HVAC systems, low flow fixtures, recycled content materials and low -water use landscaping. Additionally, the development would offer abundant bicycle storage and clos e proximity to local and regional trails , as well as mass transit at the adjacent Southwest Light Rail Beltline Boulevard Station. Together, these sustainability features would exceed the city’s current green building policy requirements. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 3 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC Proposed Beltline Residences concept site plan Proposed Beltline Residences building rendering Pending approval of its financing, the Redeveloper plans to commence construction on Beltline Residences by February 1, 2022 and substantially complete it by February 1, 2024. Beltline Residences, LLC would own and manage the development up to its stabilization and then sell it to its investors for the long term. The final plat and Second Reading of the Ordinance creating the PUD to allow construction of the proposed development were approved by the city council on July 6, 2021. Redeveloper’s request for tax increment financing assistance: The Redeveloper previously indicated that Beltline Residences’ financial proforma exhibited a gap preventing it from achieving a market rate of return sufficient to attract financing. To offset this gap, the Redeveloper applied to the EDA for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance. The EDA/city council received a staff report detailing the Redeveloper’s TIF Application at the July 26, 2021 study session along with a recommendation for the appropriate level of assistance. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 4 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC Level and type of financial assistance: In summary, the Redeveloper’s sources and uses statements, cash flow projections, and investor rate of return (ROR) related to the proposed mixed use, mixed income de velopment were reviewed by staff and Ehlers (the EDA’s financial consultant). Based upon its analysis of the Redeveloper’s financial proforma, Ehlers determined that the development would not be reasonably expected to occur on the site in the foreseeable future but/for the provision of up to $5.2 million in tax increment assistance. The TIF assistance would be committed to reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of its Public Redevelopment Costs (which includes the costs of building demolition, soil remediation and correction as well as structured parking). Upon completion of the building and verification of the Redeveloper’s qualified Public Redevelopment Costs, tax increment generated from the increased value of the property would be provided to the Rede veloper on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, which is the preferred financing method under the city's TIF Policy. It is projected that the TIF Note would be paid off in approximately eight years with increment generated by the development consistent with other rede velopments the EDA has previously facilitated. Proposed redevelopment contract: Business terms for providing the financial assistance to the proposed development were provided in the August 23, 2021 study session Staff report. The proposed redevelopment contract specifies the mutual obligations between the EDA and the Beltline Residences, LLC as well as the terms of the financial assistance to be provided. The following is a summary o f the key business terms within the contract which are consistent with the EDA’s TIF Policy, past practices and previous discussions with the EDA/city council. The “Redevelopment Property” consists of the property highlighted in the aerial photo below. “Redevelopment Property” for proposed Beltline Residences development 1.The Redeveloper agrees to construct a multifamily housing development on the Redevelopment Property consisting of approximately 250 units of multifamily housin g with a mix of studio, one -bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom units, including six live/work units on the ground floor fronting Beltline Boulevard, approximately 7,445 Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 5 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC square feet of ground floor commercial space along with approximately 320-structured parking stalls and approximately 32 surface parking stalls , as well as all associated infrastructure, sidewalks and landscaping. (the “Development”). 2.The EDA agrees to reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of its Public Redevelopment Costs (defined as the costs of building demolition, soil remediation and correction, and construction of the structured parking) incurred during construction of the Development through tax increment financing (TIF) up to $5,200,000. 3.The EDA agrees to issue a tax increment revenue note (“TIF Note”) to the Redeveloper in the maximum principal amount of $5,200,000 payable from available tax increment, generated by the Development on a “pay-as-you-go” basis, over a period of approximately eight years. The TIF Note will bear interest at the lesser of 4.25% or Redeveloper’s actual financing interest rate. The TIF Note would not constitute a business subsidy as the development meets the redevelopment exception under Minnesota statutes. 4.I n order to p rovide the tax increment to the Redeveloper, the EDA agrees to establish a new redevelopment TIF district consisting of a single parcel: 3440 Beltline Boulevard. 5.The EDA will issue the TIF Note to the Redeveloper upon completion of the Minimum Improvements and Redeveloper providing the EDA with a statement specifying the Public Redevelopment Costs incurred by the Redeveloper related to the Development along with evidence that each identified Public Redevelopment Cost has been paid or incurred by the Redeveloper. 6.The TIF assistance will be subject to a "look back" analysis to be performed by Ehlers, the EDA’s financial consultant. Under the provision, the Redeveloper would be required to submit final project costs related to the Development and reports detailing the Development’s actual financial performance. The look back provision ensures that if the Development’s total Public Redevelopment Costs are lower or if the project performs financially better upon stabilization than the Redeveloper’s estimates, the EDA shares economically in the success of the project by reducing the amount of TIF assistance provided. 7.Construction of the Development will commence by February 1, 2022 and will be substantially completed by February 1, 2024. 8.Redeveloper will construct the Development, arrange for its management by an experienced property manager and maintain it in good condition until the Contract terminates. 9.Redeveloper will comply with the city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy in effect at the time of its planning applications. Specifically, Redeveloper agrees to a 25-year covenant designating at least 25 (10 percent) of the total rental housing units will be reserved for households at or below 50 percent of area median income (AMI) and distribute the affordable units as follows (or as mutually agreed by the parties): five studio units, 14 Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 6 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC one-bedroom units, three two-bedroom units, two three -bedroom units, and one live - work unit. 10. Redeveloper will use reasonable efforts to meet the following business enterprise and workforce participation goals for women and black, indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) in conjunction with construction of the Development: Participation Goals Women BIPOC Business Enterprises 6% 13% Workforce 20% 32% Participation goals would be applied to the Redeveloper’s project as a whole and pertain to the total amount of construction and related contracts. Redeveloper would provide and use reasonable efforts to cause its contractors/subcontractors to provide certain information and resources to prospective contractors/subcontractors before bidding; to implement procedures designed to notify women and BIPOC about contracting opportunities; to document steps taken to comply with participation goals and the results of actions taken; and to provide compliance report(s). Failure to achieve these goals would not constitute a breach or default by Redeveloper. 11. Redeveloper will comply with the city’s Green Building Policy (in effect at the time of submission of its planning applications) and design the Development to LEED, B3 guidelines or another similar certification in its construction and operation. Sustainability features to be included in the development include: • rooftop solar array installation. • one public and 30 private Level 1 electric vehicle charging stations. • four public and two private 3.8KW Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations. • LED Lighting. • Low VOC paints and adhesives. • procedures for construction waste recycling. • higher efficiency Magic-Pak HVAC units. • bike storage count: o 16 exterior o 270 interior • low flow toilet fixtures. • recycled content materials. • low water-use landscaping. • public outdoor green space. 12. Redeveloper will install the following items, at a minimum, in conformity with the city’s Planning Development Contract: • Level 1 and 2 electric vehicle charging stations and conduit for additional future Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations as provided above; • bicycle parking stalls as provided above; • landscaping and public art on the Redevelopment Property; • all items required under the city’s Building Readiness Ordinances. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 7 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC 13.Redeveloper and EDA mutually agree to enter into a Minimum Market Value Assessment Agreement setting a minimum property tax value for the Development. 14.Redeveloper agrees to pay reasonable administrative costs incurred by the EDA, including consultant and attorney fees, in connection with the Development. 15.If Redeveloper defaults under the Contract, the EDA may (among other things) terminate the TIF Note and the Contract. 16.The Contract and TIF Note will terminate upon the earliest of the final payment of principal and interest on the TIF Note, the required decertification of the TIF District, or an uncured Event of Default under the Contract. A copy of the redevelopment contract is available for review in the community development department. Summary: As indicated in the July 26, 2021 study session staff report, it has been determined that the proposed Beltline Residences development has a verified financial gap and is not financially feasible but for the provision of tax increment financing. To offset this gap, it is proposed that the EDA consider reimbursing the Redeveloper up to $5.2 million in pay-as-you-go tax increment generated by the redevelopment for a term of approximately eight years. Providing tax increment financing assistance to the proposed Beltline Residences development makes it possible to: •redevelop property with a structurally substandard building that is environmentally impacted. •provide the city with a major mixed use, mixed income, transit-oriented development consistent the city’s strategic priorities, comprehensive plan, and the Beltline Station area framework and design guidelines. •further diversify the city’s housing stock with 250 new multifamily housing units. Of those, 25 would be affordable to households at 50% AMI and the remaining 225 units would be leased at market rate. The reduced rent units would be kept affordable for at least 25 years. Additionally, six of the units would be designed as live/work and several of the affordable units would have three bedrooms to accommodate larger families. •construct modern , multifamily housing adjacent to multi-modal transportation including sidewalks, local and regional trails, roads as well as bus and light rail transit. •add approximately 7,450 square feet of new commercial development to accommodate a restaurant and coffee shop to the economic benefit of the surrounding area as well as the adjacent local and regional trails and light rail. •facilitate $78 million in new in vestment and create 58 new jobs further invigorating the Beltline area and city. •bring the subject property to optimal market value and generate nearly $1.2 million in annual property taxes further adding to the city’s tax capacity and economic vitality. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 8 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC •construct a quality building (e.g., sound architectural design, class materials I materials and quality construction) with numerous sustainable elements that will substantially enhance the Re development Property ’s aesthetics. •install a future traffic signal at the Beltline Boulevard/Park Glen intersection. Opus Development’s proposed Beltline Residences project meets statutory requirements, as well as all objectives, qualifications and guidelines for the provision of tax increment as specified in the city’s TIF Policy . The proposed amount of TIF assistance is in-line with other developments the EDA has previously assisted. Recommendation: Staff supports approval of the proposed redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC as outlined above so as to advance the Beltline Residences development. The attached resolution of approval allows for modifications to the contract that do not alter the substance of the transaction without bringing the contract back to the EDA for amendment. Next steps: Upon approval of the redevelopment contract, the Redeveloper plans to apply for the required building permit, close on its construction financing and commence de molition, environmental remediation and building construction by February 1, 2022. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 9 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC EDA Resolution No. 21-____ Resolution approving contract for private red evelopment and authorizing the issuance of a Tax Increment Revenue Note (Beltline Residences Project) to Beltline Residences, L.L.C. Be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners (the “Board”) of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) as follows: Section 1. Authorization; Award of Sale. 1.01. Authorization . The Authority and the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”) have approved the establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”), a redevelopment district, within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”), and have adopted a tax increment financing plan for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, the Authority is authorized to issue and sell its bonds for the purpose of financing a portion of the public development costs of the Project. Such bonds are payable from all or any portion of revenues derived from the TIF District and pledged to the payment of the bonds. The Authority hereby finds and determines that it is in the best interests of the Authority that it issue and sell its Tax Increment Revenue Note (Beltline Residences Project) (the “Note”) for the purpose of financing certain public redevelopment costs of the Project. 1.02. Approval of Agreement; Issuance, Sale, and Terms of the Note. (a)The Contract for Private Redevelopment (the “Agreement”) between the Authority and Beltline Residences, L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company (the “Owner”), as presented to the Board, is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President and Executive Director, provided that execution of the Agreement by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval. Authority staff and officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to perform the Authority’s obligations under the Agreement as a whole, including without limitation execution of any documents to which the Authority is a party referenced in or attached to the Agreement, all as described in the Agreement. (b)The Authority hereby authorizes the President and Executive Director to issue the Note in accordance with the Agreement. All capitalized terms in this resolution have the meaning provided in the Agreement unless the context requires otherwise. (c)The Note shall be issued to the Owner in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $5,200,000 in consideration of certain eligible costs incurred by the Owner under the Agreement, shall be dated the date of delivery thereof, and shall bear interest at the lesser of 4.25% or, if the property is subject to financing, the actual rate of financing obtained by the Owner, from the date of issue per annum to the earlier of maturity or prepayment. The Note Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 10 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC will be issued in the principal amount of Public Redevelopment Costs submitted and approved in accordan ce with Section 3.4 of the Agreement. The Note is secured by Available Tax Increment, as further described in the form of the Note herein. The Authority hereby delegates to the Executive Director the determination of the date on which the Note is to be de livered, in accordance with the Agreement. Section 2. Form of Note . The Note shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, with the blanks to be properly filled in and the principal and interest rate amounts adjusted as of the date of issue. Section 3. Terms, Execution and Delivery. 3.01. Denomination, Payment. The Note shall be issued as a single typewritten note numbered R-1. The Note shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be payable by mail to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the month preceding the Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day. 3.03. Registration . The Authority hereby appoints the Chief Financial Officer of the City to perform the functions of registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the Authority and the Registrar with respe ct thereto shall be as follows: (a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its office a bond register in which the Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of the Note and the registration of transfers and exchanges of the Note. (b) Transfer of Note. Upon surrender for transfer of the Note duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form reasonably satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, a new Note of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each Payment Date and until such Payment Date. (c) Cancellation . The Note surrendered upon any transfer shall be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the Authority. (d) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When the Note is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on such Note or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 11 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC Registrar shall incur no liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (e) Persons Deemed Owners. The Authority and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name the Note is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Note, whether the Note shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on such Note and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner’s order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the Authority upon such Note to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (f) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of the Note, the Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee, or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. (g) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Note. In case any Note shall become mutilated or be lost, stolen, or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Note of like amount, Termin ation Dates and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of such mutilated Note or in lieu of and in substitution for such Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case the Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Note was lost, stolen, or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance, and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the Authority and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. The Note so surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation sh all be given to the Authority. If the mutilated, lost, stolen, or destroyed Note has already matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new Note prior to payment. 3.04. Preparation and Delivery. The Note shall be prepared under the direction of the Executive Director and shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the signatures of its President and Executive Director. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Note shall ce ase to be such officer before the delivery of the Note, such signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until delivery. When the Note has been so executed, it shall be delivered by the Executive Director to the Owner thereof in accordance with the Agreement. Section 4. Security Provisions. 4.01. Pledge . The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note all Available Tax Increment, as defined in the Note. Available Tax Increment shall be applied to payment of the principal of and interest on the Note in accordance with the terms of the form of Note set forth in Section 2 of this resolution. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 12 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC 4.02. Bond Fund. Until the date the Note is no longer outstanding and no principal thereof or interest thereon (to the extent required to be paid pursuant to this resolution) remains unpaid, the Authority shall maintain a separate and special “Bond Fund” to be used for no purpose other than the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note. The Authority irrevocably agrees to appropriate to the Bond Fund on or before each Payment Date the Available Tax Increment in an amount equal to the Payment then due, or the actual Available Tax Increment, whichever is less. Any Available Tax Increment remaining in the Bond Fund shall be transferred to the Authority’s account for the TIF District upon the termination of the Note in accordance with its terms. 4.03. Additional Obligations . The Authority will issue no other obligations secured in whole or in part by Available Tax Increment unless such pledge is on a subordinate basis to the pledge on the Note. Section 5. Certification of Proceedings. 5.01. Certification of Proceedings . The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Owner of the Note certified copies of all proceedings and records of the Authority, and such other affidavits, certificates, and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Note as the same appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates, and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representations of the Authority as to the facts recited therein. Section 6. Effective Date . This resolution shall be effective upon approval. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority September 20, 2021 Karen Barton, executive director Tim Brausen, president Attest Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 13 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC EXHIBIT A to AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION UNITED STATE OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY No. R-1 $_____________ TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE (BELTLINE RESIDENCES PROJECT) Date Rate of Original Issue [lesser of 4.25% or Redeveloper’s actual financing rate] ___________, 20__ The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”), for value received, certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to Beltline Residences, L.L.C. or registered assigns (the “Owner”), the principal sum of $__________ and to pay interest thereon at the rate of ______ percent (__%) per annum, solely from the sources and to the extent set forth herein. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings provided in the Contract for Private Redevelopment, dated as of _________, 2021 (the “Agreement”), between the Authority and the Owner, unless the context requires otherwise. 1. Payments. Principal and interest (“Payments”) shall be paid on August 1, 2024 and each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including February 1, 2032 (the “Payment Dates”) in the amounts and from the sources set forth in Section 3 herein. Payments shall be applied first to accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal. Simple interest accruing from the date of issue through and including February 1, 2024 shall be added to principal. Payments are payable by mail to the address of the Owner or such other address as the Owner may designate upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Authority. Payments on this Note are payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, on the Payment Date, is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts. 2. Interest. Simple interest at the rate stated herein shall accrue on the unpaid principal, commencing on the date of original issue. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a year of 360 days and charged for actual days principal is unpaid. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 14 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC 3. Available Tax Increment. (a) Payments on this Note are payable on each Payment Date solely from and in the amount of Available Tax Increment, which shall mean, on each Payment Date, ninety-five percent (95%) of the Tax Increment attributable to the Minimum Improvements and Redevelopment Property that is paid to the Authority by Hennepin County, Minnesota in the six (6) months preceding the Payment Date. (b) The Authority shall have no obligation to pay principal of and interest on this Note on each Payment Date from any source other than Available Tax Increment and the failure of the Authority to pay the entire amount of principal or interest on this Note on any Payment Date shall not constitute a default hereunder as long as the Authority pays principal and interest hereon to the extent of Available Tax Increment. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay any unpaid balance of principal or accrued interest that may remain after the final Payment on February 1, 2032. 4. Default. If on any Payment Date there has occurred and is continuing any Event of Default under the Agreement, the Authority may withhold from payments hereunder under all Available Tax I ncrement. If the Event of Default is thereafter cured in accordance with the Agreement, the Available Tax Increment withheld under this Section shall be deferred and paid, without interest thereon, within thirty (30) days after the Event of Default is cured. If the Event of Default is not cured in a timely manner, the Authority may terminate this Note by written notice to the Owner in accordance with the Agreement. 5. Prepayment. The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Note is pre payable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular Payment otherwise required to be made under this Note. 6. Nature of Obligation . This Note is one of an issue in the total principal amount of $_________, issued to aid in financing certain public redevelopment costs and administrative costs of a Project undertaken by the Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, and is issued pursuant to and in accordance with the terms of an authorizing resolution (the “Resolution”) duly adopted by the Board of Commissioners of the Authority on _________, 2021, and pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended. This Note is a limited obligation of the Authority which is payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under the Resolution. This Note and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the Authority. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto. Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 15 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC 7. Registration and Transfer. This Note is issuable only as a fully registered note without coupons. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Note is transferable upon the books of the Authority kept for that purpose at the principal office of the Finance Director of the City, by the Owner hereof in person or by such Owner’s attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Note together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed by the Owner. Upon such transfer or exchange and the payment by the Owner of any tax, fee, or governmental charge required to be paid by the Authority with respect to such transfer or exchange, there will be issued in the name of the transferee a new Note of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate, and maturing on the same dates. Except as otherwise provided in Section 3.3(c) of the Agreement, this Note shall not be transferred to any person or entity, unless the Authority has provided written consent to such transfer. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen, and to be performed in order to make this Note a valid and binding limited obligation of the Authority according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been performed in due form, time and manner as so required. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority have caused this Note to be executed with the manual signatures of its President and Executive Director, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Executive Director President Economic development authority meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 7d) Page 16 Title: Redevelopment contract with Beltline Residences, LLC REGISTRATION PROVISIONS The ownership of the unpaid balance of the within Note is registered in the bond register of the Chief Financial Officer of the City, in the name of the person last listed below. Date of Registration Registered Owner Signature of Chief Financial Officer Beltline Residences, L.L.C. Federal Tax I.D. No. _______________ Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Presentation: 2a Executive summary Title: Proclamation honoring Friends of the Arts Executive Director Jamie Marshall Recommended action: Mayor to read and present proclamation to Jamie Marshall who will be in attendance at the meeting. Policy consideration: None Summary: Jamie Marshall joined St. Louis Park Friends of the Arts in 2016 and moved into his role as Executive Director the following year. He is now leaving the organization for another opportunity. We wish to thank Jamie and acknowledge his outstanding contributions and dedicated service to our community by declaring Sept. 20, 2021 “Jamie Marshall Day”. Financial or budget considerations: None Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Proclamation Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, administrative services office assistant Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 2a) Page 2 Title: Proclamation honoring Friends of the Arts Executive Director Jamie Marshall Proclamation Declaring Sept. 20, 2021, “Jamie Marshall Day” Whereas, Jamie Marshall has worked for St. Louis Park Friends of the Arts since March 2016; and Whereas, Jamie has built trusting relationships across the City of St. Louis Park and its many community partners; and Whereas, Jamie has actively supported the engagement of the St. Louis Park community through the expansion of arts programming; and Whereas, Jamie has increased community access to financial resources to support lifelong pursuit of the arts by leading the Arts for Life Scholarship program; and Whereas, Jamie has facilitated the repair and donation of musical instruments to St. Louis Park youth through his leadership of the Gift of Music program; and Whereas, Jamie has supported the creation of public art experiences for the City of St. Louis Park and its residents through his leadership and management of the Arts and Culture Grant program; and Whereas, Jamie has developed multiple avenues for artists and audiences to find one another, enriching the community and providing opportunities for amateur and professional artists alike through the St. Louis Park Art Fair, Artist Showcase, Art Walk in the Park and Poetry Jams; and Whereas, Jamie has strengthened Friends of the Arts, as well as the City of St. Louis Park and its many community stakeholders by developing a strategic roadmap for advancing arts and culture within our community, Now therefore be it resolved that the Mayor and City Council of the City of St. Louis Park acknowledge Jamie Marshall’s outstanding contributions, dedicated service, and support to our community and its people, and ask all to join us in declaring September 20, 2021, as “Jamie Marshall Day.” Wherefore, I set my hand and cause the Great Seal of the City of St. Louis Park to be affixed this 20th day of September 2021. _________________________________ Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Minutes: 3a Unofficial minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota July 12, 2021 The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: none Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), CIO (Ms. Schmitt), Interim Deputy City Manager (Ms. Walsh), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Community Development Director (Ms. Barton), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther), Senior Planner (Ms. Monson), Police Chief Harcey, Fire Chief Koering, Communications and Marketing Manager (Ms. Smith) Guests: George Sherman and team from Sherman Group and DKV Developers 1. Retirement recognition of Tom Harmening Mayor Spano read a statement in recognition of city manager Tom Harmening. On behalf of the city, he thanked Mr. Harmening for all his work over the years. The councilmembers each reflected on Mr. Harmening’s work and honored him for his years of service. Councilmember Brausen stated eight years ago when he came on council, he met Mr. Harmening and was a bit intimidated by him, especially as he held the highest city office next to the mayor. He stated ultimately, they became good friends and Mr. Harmening has guided the city and the many city councils wonderfully and encouraged the city in all their successes. He stated Mr. Harmening is the one who has put the city in the great and successful position that they are in today. Councilmember Brausen thanked Mr. Harmening for his part in that, as well as his many years of service. Councilmember Kraft stated he has been on council for a year and a half and noted the pandemic and civil unrest that came about. He stated he was very thankful to have Mr. Harmening as city manager, and thankful that the council was able to rely on him for anything that came the city’s way. He stated before he joined council, he worked in the non-profit world with students, and that is where he saw how unique St. Louis Park is and how the city works together, adding a large part of this comes from Mr. Harmening and the culture he has set. He added Mr. Harmening is a hard act to follow and the biggest compliment one can give is that Mr. Harmening is a great act to follow, because when real leaders leave, they do not leave a void or a failing organization. They leave an organization that will flourish. He stated the council now has a unique opportunity to tackle the biggest issues of the day and how they do day-to- day work on racial equity and climate change. He is appreciative of what prior councils and staff have provided over the years. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 Councilmember Harris noted she met Mr. Harmening about 9 years ago, has watched him cultivate leaders over the years, and when challenges arose for the council, Mr. Harmening encouraged them to rise to the occasion. She added it was not always easy, but over time the council has been able to address their primary concerns of racial equity and climate change and the city is forward looking. Mr. Harmening has helped them get there. She thanked him for his service over the years. Lt. Governor Flanagan stated she wanted to be here tonight to honor Mr. Harmening as well. She stated she lives in St. Louis Park and as a young person had the benefit of Mr. Harmening’s leadership then, and now as a mom as well. She and many others have benefited from his leadership as well. Lt. Governor Flanagan added the city’s AAA bond rating as well as affordable housing and race equity and inclusion work has all happened under Mr. Harmening’s watch and she is grateful for this work. She presented him with a certificate from the State of Minnesota signed by Governor Walz, in appreciation of Mr. Harmening’s work for the community and for setting up a solid foundation for the city to build on. Councilmember Rog stated Mr. Harmening is an excellent executive. She will miss his capacity to say in 10 words what she says in 100 words, his broad and detailed knowledge of St. Louis Park, his patience in managing all the questions and council’s learning curves, his impatience as a helpful indicator that things can feel unmanageable, that sometimes council needs to regroup and come back to items, and his love of his job, which is fulfilling to him. She stated he was made to be a city manager and added she will miss him and wished him all the best. Councilmember Dumalag noted how she met Mr. Harmening, and how he assisted her when she first came on council. She added Mr. Harmening knows how to lead teams and works well with staff and council. She thanked him for his years of service. Councilmember Mohamed stated when she first met Mr. Harmening, she was very intimidated by him, but later saw him in a more relaxed moment and realized he was not that at all. She stated he will be a missing piece and he has built something worth carrying on, adding every part of the city has his fingerprints on it. She stated in her culture, anyone who brings value or guidance to life – “without you is dry desert” – and without them all that you have known is gone or a piece is missing. She stated the legacy Mr. Harmening has built for the city – he should be proud of. She thanked him for all his work for the city. Mayor Spano stated this is a tough transition. He commented about when he first met Mr. Harmening and their discussion about Excelsior and Grand. He stated Mr. Harmening also talks about the council to provide direction and clarity to staff, and this is a partnership in many ways. He added Mr. Harmening has always understood the importance of council as decision makers and staff as implementers. Mayor Spano added there may not be anyone in the city who loves St. Louis Park more than Mr. Harmening, as reflected in his constant concern for the city. Mayor Spano stated he will always remember the relationship they built in the difficult times the city faced and how important Mr. Harmening has been both professionally and personally to the council. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 3 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 Mr. Harmening stated it has been a privilege and an honor to work for this community and he has been here the longest time in his career and the city council has always been very positive and forward thinking. He added he wants to be sure he is clear when he says all the things, they have accomplished over the years is not about “I” but about “we” and “team” and “community”. He added the council and the community have allowed him to participate and have a role in all of the things they have dealt with and difficult things as well. He thanked staff, adding they are topnotch, and things will be fine because the city is set up well for the future. He added the partnerships within the community help it be stronger with groups like STEP, Perspectives, and Friends of the Arts, allowing for great things to be done. He thanked the council and staff for the opportunity and the council for their kind words and thoughts. 2. 2022 budget update Ms. Schmitt presented the report. Councilmember Harris asked about temporary staff pay rate not being competitive and having trouble keeping seasonal staff. She asked what typical pay for seasonal staff is and what is needed for an increase. Ms. Walsh stated it has been increasingly difficult to hire staff the past couple of years and the city is falling behind market rate. She added there are several jobs the city has not been able to fill this summer and temp salaries are one of the bigger increases depending on the job and will have to go up $1 to $3 per hour to remain competitive next summer. Councilmember Rog stated she supports paying decent wages and she asked what the total increase of rates would be. Ms. Walsh stated it may be around $120,000 between all the divisions. Councilmember Kraft stated it would be useful when looking at home values to see rental and multi-family housing rates. Ms. Schmitt stated right now commercial is not stable so she did not bring that information this time but will in the future. Councilmember Kraft asked about valuations relative to taxes and the increases. Ms. Schmitt stated the market value went up less, but more in the residential areas versus other areas and that is where the bulk of new taxes will come from. Councilmember Kraft asked about the EDA levy, noting $200,000 for staff salaries, and asked where those get funded today. Ms. Schmitt stated they are funded by the development fund, but that is not a steady source, so the fund balance is used. Councilmember Kraft asked if the EDA levy will be used for climate and development. Ms. Schmitt stated yes. Ms. Schmitt stated the EDA levy can be used for commercial, within the climate investment fund. She noted it will be commercial programs and multi-family housing that is authorized, adding this will be discussed with the city attorney first. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 4 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 Councilmember Kraft asked if it can be used for residential programs such as solar sundown, or only commercial. Ms. Barton stated the EDA levy can only be used for commercial purposes, and not single family. It can be used for multi-family rental only, which is considered more commercial. Councilmember Kraft asked if it can be used for a tree planting program. Ms. Barton stated that would be a stretch, depending on context, and would need to be run by the city attorney to interpret. Councilmember Kraft stated the EDA levy would be easily explainable for climate work, but for development staff salaries, it seems it would be more difficult. Mr. Harmening added the HRA levy is used for housing staff salaries to run the programs the city has and the same holds true for the EDA levy, so that is an allowable expense. He added the development fund is a precious resource and some of the funds are tied up in loans, or real estate the city owns. He stated it has no ongoing funding source, adding the fund for strategic property acquisitions, where capital is needed upfront and later returned. Mr. Harmening added they are proposing to slowly decrease the amount used for salaries and then use the EDA levy for salaries in 2023 so, over time, the development fund is not relied on for staff salaries. He also noted the council can make changes to that. Councilmember Rog referenced the general fund balance and asked if staff has clear direction from council on flattening the levy or making investments for the future. Ms. Schmitt stated she sees the council is comfortable with the preliminary 4.5%, using fund balance overages to offset, and also to flatten out the levy increase in 2024 and 2025. She is working on several options and will bring those forward. Councilmember Rog asked how much the city is looking at for the $6 million this year. Mr. Harmening stated $500,000 would be set aside for climate investment and the council will be asked to assign that $5 million in the next month. Staff will present where that will go. He added the fund balance can be used for projects to even out the levy increase, noting this is a good problem to have. Councilmember Harris referenced next steps, noting that by Sept. 25 the preliminary levy will need to be set. She asked over the next 9 weeks, can staff provide a list of what 0% levy would bring to the city and how would the city be impacted, and then at 3% and at 4.5%. She asked what would constituents get at those various levy percentages. Ms. Schmitt stated at 0% there would be big cuts, with lowering capital costs. She stated she can get this information for council at the Aug. 23 council meeting. Councilmember Harris noted the EDA levy is at .53% and asked about the HRA levy as well. Ms. Schmitt stated it is 1.4% approximately. Councilmember Harris also asked about the financial impact for residents on these as well for discussion points. Councilmember Brausen stated the council was committed to minimizing the tax increase because of concerns with the economy. He stated most single-family homeowners had a net reduction in property taxes as the county did not increase at all, and the city stayed at a 4.5% levy. He added the council knew it would have a greater impact this year with the hot real estate market. He asked constituents to suggest what they would like cut from city services in City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 5 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 order to keep the levy low. He noted the 4.5% will be difficult to get to maintain the same city services and staff levels as well. He is supportive of staff increases noting they do a great job for the city. He is also supportive of the EDA levy, but this is a necessary tax increase as well. He stated he supports staff recommendations and also the 6% tax levy increase, even though staff will look at ways to lower it. Councilmember Mohamed asked how the values of residential homes will be affected as we look at the levy. Ms. Schmidt stated the levy is based on home values, and tax rates are based on the total value of the whole city. Because residential values are higher than commercial properties, the percentages will apply to more dollars for residential than last year. Councilmember Mohamed stated she is supportive of the direction staff is taking this. She trusts staff will be able to find a balance here to bring back to council for further discussion. Councilmember Dumalag stated she would like to see impacts to rental as well as commercial properties at the next meeting. She added she likes the direction also at 4.5% and is supportive. Councilmember Kraft stated he is interested in using some of the money for a transformative investment in climate or racial equity. He added this would leave about $3-4 million for something else and asked if this is correct. Ms. Schmitt stated that is correct, but there are some capital funds that need assistance and additional projects in 2022 that need assistance, such as Connect the Park segments. Mr. Harmening noted there is $5 million in the America Rescue plan, and that is good to have as well. He added it will be helpful to keep this in mind and to leverage both. Councilmember Kraft asked how council can be helpful here and contemplating a transformative investment. Mr. Harmening stated it would be helpful to have context here. The council will provide these ideas at a later meeting. Councilmember Rog asked how and when the upcoming TIF request will impact the city’s debt service. Ms. Schmitt stated it will not impact the 2022 budget, and it will not come back as a levy to taxpayers. Mr. Harmening explained the developer is requesting TIF and will find a lender, so the city is not obligated to take the debt or pay it back, but just share the incremental taxes with the lender. He added if the levy were impacted, it would be for services for the project if it demands more costs from the city. Councilmember Harris stated she supports both the EDA and HRA levies as proposed, adding it is important to begin the climate investment fund. Mayor Spano stated his primary interest is around minimizing any increases. He asked about restricting the fire program, noting he would like to see what the impact was, and some follow up. He asked what other cities are doing around revenue generation that St. Louis Park is not, and maybe why the city is not doing that, such as corporate sponsorships. He also asked if staff City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 6 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 looks into grants and if there is staff that works on this. He stated he wants to be sure the city is as expansive as possible when looking at all opportunities. Ms. Schmitt stated a local option sales tax and franchise fees are what other cities are working on. She stated she can look further into this and bring more information back to council. Mr. Harmening added the city is extremely aggressive on obtaining grants from government entities and is a leader in this area. He added more exploration could be done in non- government entities related to foundations that work on housing or climate. He stated Chief Koering uses his staff and outside sources to write grants also. 3. Developer presentation – Beltline Boulevard Station Mr. Hunt introduced George Sherman, CEO of Sherman Associates, and his team to present the report. Councilmember Rog stated she is appreciative of the developer’s signature and design to the project. She asked how you will decide on the project elements, what will work for St. Louis Park, and what goes into those decisions. The developer stated there will be an engagement process with the community, it will be a journey, many comments will come into play with neighborhoods, and they will all be taken into account. George Sherman added there will be more discussion and neighborhood meetings and they are hoping to begin construction by the end of the year or first quarter of next year. Councilmember Rog stated as neighborhood meetings are planned, she hopes they will work with staff and council and look at the best way to engage the most people as possible. She added there is a new development going in near this project and asked that the designs complement each other if possible. She noted elements that were mentioned in the staff report adding that fountains and gates do not feel like St. Louis Park. She asked about the setback on the second floor above the commercial on the 7-story building and if the 5-story building has a setback. The developer stated no, it will not. Councilmember Rog asked about the public space and if it is for residents only. George Sherman stated the area will be semi-private, such as the pocket park at Gold Medal in Minneapolis, and stated it is a more intimate space that both residents and the public can access. Councilmember Rog noted there are four grocery stores in this area, and while she would like to see a co-op in this area, she wonders about hav ing another grocery store there since there are so many in the area already. She referenced the at grade crossing at Beltline, that it will be unsafe, and hopes this can be considered amidst all this new development. Councilmember Rog asked about the height of the park and ride. The developer stated it is 2.5 stories at this point. She noted some of the spaces are required by Met Council and some for the benefit of the commercial spaces. The developer stated that is correct, along with some surface parking as well, adding they are not wanting to build any more parking than absolutely needed. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 7 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 Councilmember Rog noted the parking ramp will shelter cars but building a parking ramp in this time feels a bit off, as does park and ride. She asked about financing of the parking ramp, noting there are grants covering all but the TIF request. She asked staff if this was the expectation all along. Mr. Hunt stated there was always an expectation for a local contribution towards the ramp as the CMAQ grant requires a 20% local match, so the gap covers that and a bit more. Councilmember Rog stated to be investing in a parking ramp, at that level and at this time, is something she is not excited about, but she knows it cannot be changed right now. Councilmember Dumalag asked if there was any thought as to what a parking ramp 2.0 looks like, meaning if it could be turned into housing in the future. George Sherman stated that could work, but it would double the cost of the ramp for housing, needing higher ceilings and changing to flat versus sloped ramps. They stated the better approach might be to negotiate with the Met Council on shared parking right now and cutting down the number of parking spaces. The developer added economics of this plan does not work for converting the ramp to future housing. Councilmember Dumalag asked if the affordable housing will be in 2-3 years. George Sherman stated yes, it takes some time to obtain 4% tax credits, but they would start applying for those credits at the beginning of the project and are confident they will receive them. She asked if each of the buildings have their own underground shared or separate parking. The developer stated it will be separate parking. Councilmember Dumalag asked if they do third party management. George Sherman stated they do direct management of their properties and have a great staff with top inspection scores received on an ongoing basis. They added they have a great working relationship with cities as well. Councilmember Dumalag asked if there will be a master operating agreement. George Sherman stated there will be a shared easement agreement for parking with shared management. Councilmember Dumalag stated she would be interested in a co-op as well. George Sherman stated they are in discussions with two Twin Cities co-ops at this time, adding they are very interested. Councilmember Harris stated she appreciates that each building looks unique and has accessibility at ground level to create active spaces. She added having the retail at ground level and being accessible is also important and it looks like there are windows, which looks better than papered over windows at Excelsior and Grand. George Sherman stated they will provide visibility and cited the Trader Joe’s they developed in downtown Minneapolis as an example. Councilmember Harris asked if there is onsite property management. The developer stated yes, with hours of 8 a.m. – 6 p.m. typically, adding there would be a nighttime staff that is on-call and available as needed. They noted there will be dedicated office staff and some shared staff as well. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 8 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 Councilmember Harris noted one of the city’s affordable housing projects provides wrap around services and asked if they will do the same. George Sherman stated they engage with Simpson House for these services and if needed, can provide it through direct contract with Simpson. Councilmember Harris stated while the city does not have many fountains, she does like the idea of a fountain and would support that. She also prefers a co-op and noted the western side of Ward 3 and Ward 4 would definitely be interested. Councilmember Brausen stated this is an exciting vision and incorporates all the design features the city is looking for. He likes fountains also and is happy to see the design and artistic elements being added. He encouraged the developers to contact Places to help develop public art at all the public stations. He added he loves the turquoise color, the large sign, and is excited the park and ride does not look like a park and ride. He added this is a beautiful rendition of the vision the council and city had. George Sherman noted they hope to also incorporate EV chargers and infrastructure now for future uses. Councilmember Brausen stated he appreciates the apartment mix and is supportive of the TIF request for the structure, parking, affordability, and environmentally friendly features. He asked what Sherman does related to the promotion of racial equity and inclusion. George Sherman stated their staff is over 50% minority, over 70% women, and they lead with their actual hiring. His company’s focus has been on mixed-income housing and they fund early childhood and adult education, especially in North Minneapolis with Dunwoody, and assistance with rebuilding Lake Street. They stated they work with minority builders to become developers as well and have a strong relationship with the Somali community at Riverside Plaza and their education endeavors. Councilmember Kraft stated he really like the affordability and number of 3-bedroom family units. He also appreciates the commitment to sustainability and how it was framed as a smart business decision as related to electric vehicles. He asked about the TIF request and the differences between the Rise on 7 project. Jason Aarsvold, Ehlers, stated the biggest difference in the two projects is that Rise on 7 is in a qualified census tract and there are more tax credits available for Rise on 7 versus the Beltline project. Jason noted it is a $35,000 difference in tax credits between the two projects, per unit. Jason explained in both projects they get grants and whatever is left over is going to be the TIF request. Councilmember Kraft asked if the TIF request will come for the market rate and a separate request for the affordable units. Ms. Barton stated the TIF request will be a packaged request for all of it. George Sherman stated it will be one TIF request and one agreement. Councilmember Kraft asked how confident they are that the tax credits will come through in the next year or two. George Sherman stated he has been doing this for 35 years and has confidence it will come through and noted he is familiar with the application process. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 9 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 Councilmember Kraft stated he appreciated their commitment to solar and asked if they plan to include roof top solar. George Sherman stated if the city expects it, they will do it, but added their existing off-site solar gardens are very efficient and are a bigger scale than those on the roof. He explained they must follow current law about requiring residents to opt in with solar, noting that about 92% opt in, adding there is a 5% discount with solar. Councilmember Kraft asked if the buildings will be all electric or will move to all electric when feasible. The developer stated they are working with the contractor on this currently. Councilmember Kraft asked if the council does not approve the TIF, what will happen with the project. The developer stated without TIF the project does not move forward and is not financially viable. Councilmember Rog asked what determines a qualified area. Jason Aarsvold stated qualified census tracts are those in which at least 50% of households have an income less than 60% of the area median gross income. George Sherman stated it is dependent on household incomes in the area and the federal government decides it, not municipalities. Councilmember Rog asked specific to this project how it will further the city’s racial equity goals. George Sherman stated they help income qualifying households obtain high quality affordable housing as well as pay over minimum wage to their staff, which is over a 50% minority staff along with minority hiring at the construction site. They also work with diverse subcontractors. Councilmember Rog added if there were an opportunity to support our city’s minority businesses through these commercial spaces, that would help the city meet their goals. She supports taking funds from the affordable housing trust fund to create housing opportunities for households at 30% AMI as well as 40-year affordability. She loves the fact there will be affordable family-size housing units close to transit and so many amenities. Councilmember Mohamed asked what the rent would be at 60% AMI for a one-bedroom unit. The developer stated it is about $960 per month, including utilities. Councilmember Mohamed stated she is excited there are 6 units at 30% AMI but that is a low number. To be more comfortable with TIF, she would want more affordability. The developer clarified it is 5 units, not 6. Councilmember Mohamed added she is happy about the affordable family units and does approve of the proposal. Mr. Hunt added it is difficult to get 30% AMI units in developments and staff was pleased the developer could incorporate five in this project. Adding this project would be among the first to have them. Ms. Barton added the city will also accept vouchers to allow them to assist households at 30% AMI. Councilmember Mohamed asked how many of the 5 units at 30% are 3-bedroom units. The developer stated it is equally distributed throughout the entire building. Mayor Spano stated this is a huge project and he is supportive of the project as a whole. He added he is happy to further discuss the crossing at Beltline and added people will use it how City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3a) Page 10 Title: Study session minutes of July 12, 2021 they want to use it, as well as at Highway 7. He shares the concerns about the parking ramp but has come to peace with it. He added he approves of fountains but thinks the developer can do much more aesthetically with the site than what has been shown so far. Mayor Spano encouraged them to be as creative as possible as this is an entry point into the city. Mayor Spano stated if the city wants large affordable units in the community, this is the time to have more conversations around this. He asked staff to provide a breakdown on what cities are doing on affordability over the last 10 years, to use as a comparison. He added he supports this project. Councilmember Kraft asked what federal policy needs to be changed in order to provide more affordable housing. George Sherman stated tax credits are the only tool the federal government has for affordable housing, and states supplement. Mr. Hunt stated next steps will be to bring forward agreements related to right of way and easement vacations, the formal TIF process, and the redevelopment contract, hopefully this fall or winter. Councilmember Rog asked for as much notice as possible on meetings to be able to notify constituents. 4. Future study session agenda planning and prioritization Topics for future discussion: • Minnetonka Blvd. • Commercial activity in city parks • Former Holiday site The meeting adjourned at 9:51 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 5. Application for medical marijuana dispensary ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Minutes: 3b Unofficial minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota July 26, 2021 The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: Tim Brausen Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), CFO (Ms. Schmitt), Planning Manager (Mr. Walther), Communications and Marketing Manager (Ms. Smith) Guests: David Moll, Redpath and Co., Auditors 1. 2020 Certified Annual Financial Report presentation David Moll, Redpath and Co., presented the 2020 report. David Moll noted the city has received the excellence in financial reporting from GFOA for the 37th consecutive year. They stated a clean opinion was issued on the 2020 financial statements for St. Louis Park, and there were no items of noncompliance noted. David Moll added the city has complied with various requirements of federal programs including coronavirus relief fund and the Dakota bridge project. Mayor Spano asked how the COVID relief funds complicate the auditors’ work both in St Louis Park and in other cities. David Moll stated the difficulty related to what was allowable and what wasn’t. They added the treasury guidance did make this easy, however. Ms. Schmitt agreed, noting staff was in communication ongoing with the auditors. Councilmember Kraft asked if the report council received on June 28, 2021 was expected to be the final report. David Moll stated yes. Councilmember Kraft noted one entry related to liabilities was incorrect and asked if that was materially incorrect. David Moll stated yes, adding the summary included had an error in the total amount, however, the financial statements were fairly stated. Councilmember Kraft asked what the process was that allowed an error to come through and how this will be avoided in the future. David Moll stated the error was in a journal entry related to capital assets. There was an amount that was repeated twice in the journal entry. Ms. Schmitt stated this was missed on the journal entry originally, and then it was caught when reviewing final reports. She added in the future staff will have a better method of reviewing the entries to ensure the right controls are in place. Also, Ms. Schmitt stated the amounts were sent to the auditors very late in the process, so that was a factor in the error. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: Study session minutes of July 26, 2021 Councilmember Kraft stated in next year’s audit report, he would like to see how staff corrected this process over last year. Councilmember Kraft asked if the auditors look at the discussion or the financial statements. David Moll stated they tie the numbers to the financial statements and summarize it. In this case, there is an error, but noted they do proof the document page by page and they are not sure how this was missed within the proofing process. He stated ultimately it is their error and they take ownership of it. Councilmember Kraft asked about the current NDNA, noting there is still a small error, and asked if he is correct that it is in the table on pages 28-29. David Moll stated on page 29, one of the numbers was updated. Councilmember Kraft asked how much of an issue this is. David Moll stated the financial statements, and the table are correct; however, the text discussion has an incorrect number. Mayor Spano clarified the finances are not the issue, but the reporting of the finances is the issue in this instance. David Moll stated that is correct. Mayor Spano stated in the future staff will create a plan to avoid mistakes such as this. Mr. Harmening stated no one wants to see errors; however, he is confident in the finances of the city. 2. Zoning and land use change at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Councilmember Rog stated in Ward 1, she has had questions from residents as to what will be happening in this location as it relates to access. She added many are interested in medium- density housing for this site and she is happy to be discussing this tonight. Mr. Walther stated this site is attractive to commercial and multiple-family residential. He noted staff has had meetings in the past with the previous owner of the land, and they were very interested in re-opening in this area. He stated the city rezoned the property from general commercial to neighborhood commercial following adoption of the comprehensive plan. While both allow residential as part of a mixed-use building, it doesn’t require it. If council desires to see residential use, the present zoning may not produce that result, and an auto-oriented commercial use seems more likely under the present zoning. He also noted MnDOT should be contacted about any land use and zoning changes that the city would want. This is a policy decision by the council. Councilmember Harris asked what the timeline would be for MnDOT to sell the parcel. Mr. Walther stated he does not know; however, it would likely be within months, not years. Councilmember Harris stated the staff report shows the population density there is not enough alone to support the local businesses, they rely on passing vehicle traffic as well as the residents in their service area. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3b) Page 3 Title: Study session minutes of July 26, 2021 Councilmember Harris stated the city goals of being more walkable and bikeable make this location a good place to add more residential and to focus on neighborhood vitalization, near neighborhood businesses. Councilmember Mohamed added she is also in favor of rezoning to residential and looks forward to what type of development comes from this area. Councilmember Dumalag asked about the parcel and arrangements of it. Mr. Walther stated MnDOT indicated it must give the former owner the first right of refusal after taking the property under eminent domain for public purposes. Councilmember Dumalag stated she is also in favor of residential on this parcel. She asked for the definition of rooming house. Mr. Walther stated it is lodging for between 3-8 persons provided by an owner-occupied building, with no provision for cooking in the rooms occupied by lodgers. He added the lodging is provided on an extended basis rather than daily or weekly. Councilmember Kraft stated there is contamination at this site and asked about the impacts and amount of clean-up that would occur there to make it safe. Mr. Walther stated it depends on the land use and would most likely require more mitigation for residential compared to commercial uses. He stated the contamination is on the low-end in complexity compared to some other areas within the city, adding this clean-up would be manageable. Councilmember Kraft added he is also supportive of rezoning for residential. Councilmember Rog noted there will be a public process on this and looking into rezoning. She thanked the councilmembers for their support and asked if the city would retain right-of-way until the area was developed. Mr. Wal ther explained MnDOT states this is excess right-of-way, so there is no vacation process for the city to go through. He added this area is guided as right- of-way in the city comprehensive plan now but there might be a need to change this, and it would be up to council to give staff direction here. Councilmember Rog asked about the size of the parcel. Mr. Walther stated he has not seen a legal description, but noted it is approximately 1.2 acres. Councilmember Rog asked if medium density allows for 30 residential units at the parcel. Mr. Walther stated yes, and depending on what the council decides, those wishes will be conveyed to developers. Councilmember Harris asked about examples around the city that might be similar density. Mr. Walther stated example developments would be Wooddale Flats, Arlington Row, and the townhomes on Texas Avenue near Wayzata. Councilmember Harris asked if the lower density would yield more expensive rents or more expensive purchase prices. Mr. Walther stated the per unit costs could be higher for construction compared to high density residential, adding it varies widely by the type of development. Councilmember Harris asked if the higher prices might be detrimental to affordable housing goals. Mr. Walther stated it may be challenging to achieve 30 units on this site under the proposed R4 zoning, but fewer units would be less complicated. Councilmember Harris asked if it is fewer units per acre, how would that impact the city’s inclusionary policy and affordable City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3b) Page 4 Title: Study session minutes of July 26, 2021 housing goals. Mr. Walther stated if built under the R4 zoning and there is not a request for tax increment financing, the development would not be subject to the inclusionary policy. Councilmember Harris asked how soon the council needs to determine which zoning to pursue. Mr. Walther stated the council should provide initial direction tonight, adding R4 multiple family residence district or R3 two family district align with the medium density land use designation. Councilmember Kraft asked if the council has any influence over rental versus ownership opportunities. Mr. Walther stated no, not relative to zoning. It was the consensus of the council to pursue this process to change the land use from commercial to medium density residential and rezone the parcel from C1 neighborhood commercial to R4 multiple family residence. 3. Future study session agenda planning and prioritization Mr. Harmening stated currently there is nothing on the August 9, 2021 agenda. He noted, however, one item proposed by Councilmembers Dumalag and Mohamed, would be language updates in the TIF policy. Councilmember Dumalag noted they would like to propose racial equity requirements for developers requesting TIF. Councilmember Mohamed added the idea behind this it to ask developers to show how they are equitable. Councilmember Rog agreed. Councilmember Kraft agreed as well, and noted the process proposed as a joint study session with HRC. Councilmember Dumalag stated the HRC noted that council does not use them enough, so they thought this might be a good opportunity to involve them in this process. Councilmember Kraft asked why the council doesn’t just ask HRC to investigate this and report back to the council. Mayor Spano stated while this topic has merit, he is not sure where this topic would be headed as it related to TIF. He added until he is clear on this, he would not want to have a joint session with HRC. He would prefer to have a deeper discussion with council first. Additionally, he is concerned about limiting this discussion to contractors and employers. Councilmember Rog state she is supportive of asking the HRC and Planning Commission for recommendations. She added she would also like to discuss, assuming the city will still provide TIF, what should be required. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3b) Page 5 Title: Study session minutes of July 26, 2021 Councilmember Mohamed stated she would like an initial meeting with the council to set the tone first, and then meet with HRC. Mr. Harmening noted staff plans to bring the TIF policy to council for a full overview, adding these two discussions could be done separately and then brought together. Councilmember Harris stated she is in favor of this conversation at a future study session also, noting she would like to have the study session on the same night as the council meeting. Communications/meeting check-in (verbal) Mr. Harmening noted emails he has received from some restaurant owners in St. Louis Park inquiring about the city’s willingness to extend the time limit on having outdoor tents. He stated the deadline is July 31, so the tents then need to be removed. He noted one request is to extent tents to October 1, and if the council would like to discuss at the next meeting, they could set up a resolution for this. Mr. Walther added some other cities have restaurants that are going to continue outdoor tent seating through December 31. He added beginning January 1, 2022, the Met Council will charge restaurants additional SAC charges for the additional seating. Councilmember Harris stated there are two businesses in Ward 3 that utilize tents and are eager to operate with the tents. She would like to have a discussion with council prior to putting it on an agenda. Mayor Spano stated in Minneapolis they are extending tents indefinitely. He stated he would like to see the city remain as flexible as possible, adding he is still supportive of short-term extensions for tents. Councilmember Harris stated she knows of people that prefer to eat outside, even if vaccinated, because COVID cases are increasing slightly. She proposed the council extend the tents to October 1. Councilmember Mohamed stated she prefers some practices that came out of COVID, including being as flexible as possible. She would like to extend the deadlines and also would like a council discussion about this to make it beneficial for all. Councilmember Dumalag stated she got an email from a business in Ward 2 as patrons do not feel safe dining inside. She also noted some residents have complained about parking in the neighborhood. However, she is interested in doing an extension, while enforcing capacity limits and numbers of diners. Mr. Harmening stated there are some limitations on what the city can do with enforcing capacity limits, at this time, through this mechanism. Mr. Walther added also there have not been complaints about issues at the sites using tents either. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3b) Page 6 Title: Study session minutes of July 26, 2021 Councilmember Kraft stated he is supportive of extending this for 2 more months. He added while he is sensitive to anything that comes up, he does want to support businesses. Councilmember Rog stated she is also supportive of this. She asked if there are any lessons that have come out of this issue. Mayor Spano added he is interested in doing an extension right now, but would not want this to be ongoing, and to set expectations for the future. Councilmember Rog suggested November 1 versus October 1 as an extension date. Councilmember Harris prefers October 1 and being equitable and being fluid. She stated if the city goes into November, then there might be an ask for December 1. Councilmember Kraft stated he does not have a preference on dates. Mr. Walther suggested adding this to the consent agenda with the date of October 1 for the extension. It was the consensus of the council to put this on the next agenda, and to support an extension to October 1. Written Reports Councilmember Rog referenced the TIF request for the Beltline Residences, noting she reviewed the design guidelines for the area and several residents have concerns about the Opus development design. She stated some of the guidelines have not been met on this project design, including the areas of building corners at major intersections to create entryways. She also noted streetscapes as an area of concern. Additionally, the setbacks, landscaping are not noteworthy in the design either. She asked how far along is the design on this project and if there is any recourse here as it relates to the design guidelines. Mr. Walther stated the council has approved the PUD and TIF is being requested now. He noted the design guidelines are guidelines only and not requirements. Councilmember Rog stated going forward she would like to see the design guidelines be a more important part of the approval process on projects. Mayor Spano added going forward the council may need to look at the guidelines and point out which are not negotiable for the design of a project. Councilmember Kraft noted on the sustainability division update for Q3 he is looking forward to seeing a greenhouse gas inventory completed in September or October to give a sense of where we are in city plans. He stated with the climate issues this summer, we are now in a climate emergency, and it should be declared by the city, while also trying to work with other cities around Hennepin County. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3b) Page 7 Title: Study session minutes of July 26, 2021 Mayor Spano stated he would like to discuss this but would not be interested in using “climate emergency” as a marketing tool. Councilmember Kraft stated it can be effective as a call to action for a community and he will pull some materials together for review. Councilmember Harris noted there is a national night out event this week. Councilmember Mohamed stated she would like to visit more neighborhoods this year, meet more people, and wants to attend with others. Mr. Harmening thanked the council for their support over the years and stated the hardest part is leaving the people. He stated the new city manager will be great and asked the council to be patient with her. He noted this is the first time in 28 years a city manager is coming from outside the organization, and things will be different. He reminded the council that staff will also be adjusting to the changes. Mayor Spano noted the Sun Sailor newspaper did not accept the council’s Op Ed article for publication, citing it goes against their rules for publishing. Councilmember Mohamed asked if the annual retreat will be after the elections. Mr. Harmening stated yes. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 4 June 2021 monthly financial report 5. Second quarter investment report (April – June 2021) 6. Application for tax increment financing assistance – Beltline Residences 7. Proposed interfund loan – Bridgewater Bank TIF note 8. Building readiness ordinances 9. Sustainability division update for Q3 2021 10. Metropolitan council livable communities demonstration account grant applications ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Minutes: 3c Unofficial minutes City council meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota Aug. 2, 2021 1. Call to order Mayor Pro Tem Kraft called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 1a. Pledge of allegiance 1b. Roll call Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Larry Kraft, Tim Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: Jake Spano Staff present: City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Interim City Manager (Ms. Walsh), Assistant Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Community Development Director (Ms. Barton) Guests: none 2. Presentations 2a. Recognition of Donations Mayor Pro Tem Kraft thanked Discover St. Louis Park for a donation in an amount not to exceed $1,500 for flight and hotel related expenses for Jason West, Recreation Superintendent, to attend the Sports Events & Tourism Association (ETA) in Birmingham, AL on Oct. 25-28, 2021. 3. Approval of minutes 3a. Study session minutes of June 14, 2021 Councilmember Rog noted on page 2, it should read, “Maxfield housing study” and on page 8 it should read “…Mr. Harmening stated council will be asked to consider the TIF request at the meeting next month and developers can be asked to present at that time.” She also noted on page 8, it should read, “…currently available affordable trust funds.” Mayor Pro Tem Kraft noted on page 4, it should read “police department vs. PAC.” He also noted on page 6 it should read, “…additional funding for the employee dev fund is fine as well as other baseline adjustments totaling $1 million, as well as how to smooth future levies. He added he is fine to put additional monies into the insurance fund if we are expecting premium increases but is not interested in putting as large amount into City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3c) Page 2 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 the fund in case of future lawsuits, as he would rather invest to prevent the risk of lawsuits. He stated he is interested in transformational investments that can change the trajectory of the city on climate emissions or race equity and gave possible examples including massive tree planting and making walking and biking/scooters easier and putting more into the climate investment fund.” It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to approve the June 14, 2021, study session minutes as amended. The motion passed 5-0 (Mayor Spano and Councilmember Mohamed absent). 3b. City council meeting minutes of June 21, 2021 Councilmember Dumalag noted on page 9 it should read, “…like Perspectives.” Mayor Pro Tem Kraft noted on page 14 it should read, “array” vs. “ray”. Councilmember Rog noted on page 3 it should read, “…for sharing their Thai culture.” She noted on page 9 it should read, “Councilmember Rog noted only 1 - 3-bedroom affordable unit is promised in this development, although the developer says they will try for more, which she encouraged. She noted that under the updated inclusionary housing policy, a project of this size would require 7 affordable 3-bedroom units. She asked staff for clarification in the approval process inclusionary housing requirements become applicable. Ms. Monson stated they begin at the time of application.” It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve the June 21, 2021, city council meeting minutes as amended. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Spano absent). 3c. Study session minutes of June 28, 2021 Councilmember Brausen, on page 5, requested adding another sentence to read, “However he noted that this is a pilot program, he supports pursuing it as staff has laid out and making adjustments later depending on results.” Councilmember Dumalag noted on page 2, it should read, “She added the most effective way to approach commercial properties and multi-tenant buildings may be through building owners and management associations greater Minneapolis.” It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve the June 28, 2021, study session minutes as amended. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Spano absent). 3d. City council meeting minutes of July 6, 2021 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3c) Page 3 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 It was moved by Councilmember Harris, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve the July 6, 2021, city council meeting minutes as presented. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Spano absent). 4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar 4a. Accept for filing city disbursement claims for the period of June 26 through July 23, 2021. 4b. Adopt Resolution No. 21-075 to recognize Tom Harmening for his 26 years of service. 4c. Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2626-21 regarding general parking and approve the summary ordinance for publication. 4d. Adopt Resolution No. 21-076 rescinding Resolution No. 19-122 and approving the attached list of snow removal exempt parking areas. 4e. Adopt resolution to appoint Cynthia S. Walsh as interim city manager from Aug. 2-15, 2021. (This item was removed from the consent calendar and considered as regular agenda as item 8b.) 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 21-077 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the water service line at 3153 Pennsylvania Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 17-117-21-21-0186. 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 21-078 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 9601 West 16th Street, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 01- 117-22-41-0122. 4h. Adopt Resolution No. 21-079 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 5917 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 16-117-21-21-0056. 4i. Adopt Resolution No. 21-080 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from Discover St. Louis Park in an amount not to exceed $1,500 for flight and hotel related expenses for Jason West, Recreation Superintendent, to attend the Sports Events & Tourism Association (ETA) in Birmingham, Alabama on Oct. 25 – 28, 2021. 4j. Approve an extension until Aug. 2, 2022, for Melrose Company to record the final plats for Arlington Row Apartment East and Arlington Row Apartment West. (This item was removed from the consent calendar and considered as regular agenda as item 8c.) 4k. Adopt Resolution approving an extension of the policy for temporary outdoor and indoor customer service areas. (This item was removed from the consent calendar and considered as regular agenda as item 8d.) 4l. Approve a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for Pillsbury United Communities for their event to be held on Aug. 7, 2021. (This item was removed from the consent calendar and considered as regular agenda as item 8e.) It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mohamed, to approve the agenda and items listed on the consent calendar as amended to move consent calendar item 4e, 4j, 4k, 4l to the regular agenda as item 8b, 8c, 8d, 8e respectively; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3c) Page 4 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Spano absent). 5. Boards and commissions - none 6. Public hearings- none 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – none 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions, and discussion items 8a. First reading of ordinance pertaining to home occupations Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. Councilmember Harris asked for clarification about intensification of use and an allowance of material not typically found in a home, as well as the nuisance provision. Mr. Morrison stated materials typically not found in a home include heavy machinery, and as long as odors and vibrations were handled and managed, it would be allowed unless complaints came forward, which would then require enforcement. He added noise and odors should be minimal since the activity is required to occur within the home. Councilmember Harris stated this would mean utilizing a garage would not fit within the ordinance. Mr. Morrison agreed that is correct. Councilmember Brausen asked about land use registration. He stated if a law office were being run from a home, and an occasional client came by, would they have to register the use. Mr. Morrison stated yes, adding it is a simple one-page application stating the activity being conducted, which is then reviewed. Councilmember Brausen stated there will need to be education around this land use registration process. Councilmember Rog stated she supports the changes proposed and believes more changes are in order. She looked at this through an equity lens and feels there are many things that exclude people from entrepreneurship and starting their own businesses that could work in neighborhoods. She feels this looks at inputs and outcomes or outputs. She stated some of the recommendations that exist in the code could go further and she does not agree with some of the rationale provided by staff so far. Councilmember Rog asked why animal handling is not allowed, noting there were some changes made recently in the city’s animal handing policies. Mr. Morrison stated animal handling as a home occupation was discussed at planning commission and some changes were recently made to the commercial districts regarding animal handling. As home occupations are concerned, he stated in the residential areas, neighbors have expressed concerns about strange dogs that were next door, as well as vegetation on the business owners lot, or on the neighbors lot along the property line that can be poisonous to dogs, so the concern is about the management and care of the dogs in a City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3c) Page 5 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 neighborhood. He added those working in a commercial business may have licensure and some formal training, also the dogs are contained so as not to be a concern to neighbors. But in a residential area, there are concerns that come up. Councilmember Rog asked why massage is not allowed. Mr. Morrison stated this is a long-standing prohibition in the code. He added the city has struggled with this as there can be ill intent with massage, so it has generally been kept out of residential areas. He added the potential for abuse and the related enforcement is not suitable for residential areas. Councilmember Rog stated she is not convinced about the one employee per lot rule and suggested that the maximum occupancy be the standard. She asked why one employee per lot was decided. Mr. Morrison stated the city is increasing the ability to run all kinds of businesses so there are impacts. He stated the thought was to start out with one employee and then later, the ordinance could be changed to two employees. But if you start with 3 or 4 that occupancy limits may allow, and the ordinance is changed later, the 3-4 employees along with the activities generating the complaints can remain as legal non-conformities. He added this is why it was proposed to start with one employee, and then reevaluate the number of employees condition after sufficient time has passed to determine accurate impacts. Councilmember Rog noted registration of land use and asked if there was any other rationale for this, or who to call with complaints. Mr. Morrison stated this helps staff to review for zoning and make sure the land use meets zoning and building code. Councilmember Rog asked why a maximum of 25% is being proposed. Mr. Morrison stated one of the conditions in the code defines accessory use as 25% of the principal use. He added there can be exceptions, if the council wishes to establish a different percentage for a specific use. He noted it depends on how wide the city wants to open the door, and there could be problems with complaints and nuisances. He stated again that dialing back the ordinance does not eliminate the existing codes generating the complaints, they remain as legal non-conformities, and the ordinance recognizes the balance of residential neighborhood and commercial businesses. Councilmember Rog asked if there is any data on commercial businesses in residential areas being a nuisance. Mr. Morrison stated the city has received complaints of home occupations, many of which are occurring illegally in accessory buildings. The ordinance draws on this history and experience. Councilmember Rog asked why work is not allowed to be performed in a yard. Mr. Morrison stated noise, aesthetics, and odors are the main concerns in protecting the integrity of the neighborhood. Councilmember Rog asked about signage up to two square feet, and not seeing the business from the right-of-way. She asked if not seeing the business from the right-of- way relates to the signage or business. Mr. Morrison stated the business, all properties can display a two square foot sign. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3c) Page 6 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 Councilmember Rog stated she appreciates the work, supports this, streamlining the rules, and allowing different types of equipment. She stated it is not easy to find anything in the city code and she hopes that will be corrected and it can be more interactive. She is supportive of the changes proposed, so there is no delay to broadening access to entrepreneurship in the near term but would like to see more changes going forward including allowing massage, animal handling, more than one employee, and working in yards. She stated the city should not focus on outcomes and problems, but on entrepreneurship which can be a viable pathway to wealth and job creation. She would like the city to be thoughtful of this and why we disallow certain things and look at this through a racial equity lens. Councilmember Dumalag added she is supportive of this and does understand some of the exclusions including occupations that produce hazardous waste but asked why currency exchange and payday loan agencies were excluded. Mr. Morrison stated those uses are in a group of uses that are regulated and need to be removed from one another. He noted it is a perception issue and bringing these types of businesses into a neighborhood. Mr. Walther added the uses are allowed in the commercial districts with a condition requiring a separation of 350 feet from residences, so it is counter to the zoning intent. Councilmember Dumalag asked if these home businesses must comply with ADA requirements. Mr. Morrison stated yes, that is why the building and energy department reviews the registration applications. Councilmember Dumalag stressed this will be an important issue for those businesses that have customers and employees coming and going. Mayor Pro Tem Kraft asked how difficult the registration process is and if it is online. Mr. Morrison stated the application is online or can be done in person at city hall as well, noting there is a minimal fee. Mayor Pro Tem Kraft asked why the application is needed. Mr. Morrison explained when the public is invited into the home, it might trigger some building code requirements. The application gives the mechanism for this review. He stated it is a very quick process. Mr. Morrison stated this provides an opportunity to review before the applicant of a home-based occupation gets too far into the process and allows the city to notify the applicant of issues prior to the owners getting invested in the business. He added the city is trying to be helpful and guide folks through the process. Mayor Pro Tem Kraft noted in Mayor Spano’s letter to the council, he stressed looking at the impacts. He added he is supportive of this but would like to see clarifying language around the accessory buildings. He noted this might need to be discussed again in the future to review. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3c) Page 7 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 Councilmember Mohamed stated it is a good idea to engage with small businesses and she would like to have a review again in one year as well. She asked what the city has done so far on education. Mr. Morrison stated there is information on the website and with the changes, there will be a sub-page created on the website, about the changes. Education is ongoing. He encouraged folks to contact the city with questions about the process. Ms. Barton added Julie Grove, a small business liaison, can also help entrepreneurs interested in starting a business and walk through the regulations. She added the city works with “Open to Business” that can help with resources well. Councilmember Mohamed encouraged getting information about the land use application and other aspects of home occupation out to the public. Councilmember Harris asked what mechanisms are available to identify whether a resident lives in the primary unit or the accessory dwelling unit. Mr. Morrison stated it would be submitted in the land use application information. Councilmember Harris stated she is supportive of entrepreneurship across generations. She added it is important that the city be an ally to entrepreneurs, and she is supportive. Councilmember Rog asked if the address is the same for a home and an accessory dwelling unit. Mr. Walther stated that is yet to be determined, but there would not be a separate lot. Mayor Pro Tem Kraft read Mayor Spano’s comments into the record as follows: Mayor Spano supports the intent of this ordinance; however, he has concerns about the way this is written. He stated the nature of the provisions in this change should be more focused on the impact of livability (symptoms) rather than guidelines we think will minimize those symptoms. He stated a daily party at his house that would generate more traffic and impact to neighbors, but would be allowed, than a home-based occupation with two employees under this provision which would be prohibited. The one exception would be the 5th bullet which very clearly focuses on impacts and put another way, this is not form-based zoning, but the idea of form-based zoning is that we are less concerned with the activity inside a building and more focused on how a particular building and the activity inside impacts the adjacent neighborhood. As such he would vote against this provision and ask that it be reworked to reflect a better balance. It was moved by Councilmember Harris, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve first reading of ordinance amending chapter 36 pertaining to home occupations and set second reading for Aug. 16, 2021. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Spano absent). 8b. Appoint Cynthia S. Walsh as interim city manager from Aug. 2-15, 2021. Resolution No. 21-081 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3c) Page 8 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Dumalag, to adopt Resolution No. 21-081 appointing Ms. Walsh as interim city manager from Aug 2- 15, 2021. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Spano absent). 8c. Approve an extension until Aug. 2, 2022, for Melrose Company to record the final plats for Arlington Row Apartment East and Arlington Row Apartment West Councilmember Brausen noted this project has been proposed for properties on Wayzata Boulevard, one on the east and one on the west. He stated the city agreed to extend this so the developer could get their financing settled, plus there were issues with COVID. He stated residents have been asking about the project, which was approved in 2016 and will be going forward with the additional extension. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve an extension until Aug. 2, 2022 for Melrose Company to record the final plats for Arlington Row Apartment East and Arlington Row Apartment West. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Spano absent). 8d. Approve an extension of the policy for temporary outdoor and indoor customer service areas. Resolution No. 21-082 Councilmember Dumalag noted the temporary tents in five establishments within the city were to have the same number of diners and have them feel comfortable with seating. She added this was always tied to the governor’s order and there was a bit of concern about what to do next. She credited city staff and the restaurants for doing a temporary extension of this knowing there is the delta variant, so it will be extended to Oct. 1. It was moved by Councilmember Dumalag, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to adopt Resolution No. 21-082 approving the extension of the policy for temporary outdoor and indoor customer service areas to Oct. 1, 2021. The motion passed 6-0 (Mayor Spano absent). 8e. Approve a temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for Pillsbury United Communities for their event to be held on Aug. 7, 2021 Councilmember Dumalag noted she has a conflict of interest here as Pillsbury United Communities is a non-profit in north Minneapolis and is a client of hers. Councilmember Brausen noted this is to extend a temporary liquor license on Aug 7, 2021, from 2-7 p.m. and proceeds go to charitable services affiliated with Pillsbury United. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3c) Page 9 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 2, 2021 It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to approve the temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license for Pillsbury United Communities for their event to be held on Aug. 7, 2021. The motion passed 5-0-1 (Councilmember Dumalag abstained; Mayor Spano absent). 9. Communications Councilmember Harris noted National Night Out is Aug. 3 and encouraged folks to check with their neighborhood groups on times of events. Ms. Walsh stated Ken Sysko has a schedule and there is an online map as well. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Minutes: 3d Unofficial minutes City council meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota Aug. 16, 2021 1. Call to order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. 1a. Pledge of allegiance 1b. Roll call Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: none Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), CIO (Mr. Pires), Building and Energy Director (Mr. Hoffman), Fire Chief Koering, Police Chief Harcey, Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Chief Building Official (Mr. Skallet), Planning Manager (Mr. Walther), Property Maintenance & Licensing Manager (Mr. Pivec), Communications and Marketing Manager (Ms. Smith) Guests: members of Assistant Fire Chief Searle’s family; junior playground and junior naturalist leaders and families 2. Presentations 2a. Recognition of Assistant Fire Chief Hugo Searle’s year of service Mayor Spano read a certificate honoring Assistant Fire Chief Searle for his years of service with the City of St. Louis Park. Fire Chief Koering thanked and praised Assistant Chief Searle’s work with the city over the years as well. He presented him with a plaque representing his history with St. Louis Park, including badge numbers and awards he received. Assistant Fire Chief Searle thanked the city council for their comments and noted he still lives in the community and will serve in other ways. 2b. Playground junior leader and Westwood Hills Nature Center junior naturalist recognition Staff read the names of the playground junior leaders and junior naturalists and the councilmembers thanked them for their leadership. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3d) Page 2 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 Councilmember Brausen thanked the parents that support these young people. He also thanked the junior leaders who safeguard the care of the city’s youngest residents. Councilmember Rog agreed and thanked the group as well. 2c. Seeds Feeds Harvest Festival Day proclamation Mayor Spano read the proclamation honoring the 7th annual harvest festival. Zoe Frank, 2534 Zinran Ave. S., thanked the council for the proclamation. She reviewed her background and interests in the Seeds program, noting her passion in urban agriculture, and how this will be the future of self-sustaining food. She explained she will be moving on to college in the fall. Michelle Bissonnette, 8900 N. Minnehaha Cir., stated she is on the board of Seeds and teaches food security. She has enjoyed her work and relationships built doing this work and invited the council and new city manager to attend the harvest festival . Councilmember Kraft congratulated the group for their work, especially during COVID. He added he learned much from Zoe Frank and two other interns from their weekly videos and looks forward to the festival. 2d. Recognition of donation It was noted that a $25 donation was received from Laurie Herstig for park enhancements or program needs at Westwood Hills Nature Center. 3. Approval of minutes - none 4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar 4a. Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2624-21 amending chapter 36 pertaining to home occupations and approve summary ordinance for publication 4b. Adopt Resolution No. 21-083 electing not to waive the statutory tort limits for liability insurance 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 21-084 accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of $22,526.28 for the annual concrete replacement project with JL Theis, Inc. - Project No. 4020-0003, City Contract No. 25-20 4d. Adopt Resolution No. 21-085 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 3209 Cavell Lane, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 18-117-21- 24-0013 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 21-086 approving acceptance of a $25 donation from Laurie Herstig for park enhancements or program needs at Westwood Hills Nature Center 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 21-087 approving the Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between Millennium Phase II and GS-INVREG Wayzata Owner, LLC City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3d) Page 3 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 21-088 approving the Sixth Amendment to the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Contract related to The West End/Central Park West 4h. Adopt Resolution No. 21-089 authorizing bank signatories 4i. Adopt Resolution No. 21-090 authorizing bank signatories for the Home Remodeling Fair 4j. Adopt Resolution No. 21-091 approving removal of special assessment deferral and reinstating the special assessment on the tax rolls - 2220 Ridge Dr #14, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 4k. Approve a temporary on-sale liquor license for Church of the Holy Family at 5925 West Lake Street for their event to be held Sept. 11, 2021 4l. Approve for filing parks & recreation advisory commission minutes of Jan. 20, 2021 4m. Approve for filing parks & recreation advisory commission minutes of March 17, 2021 4n. Approve for filing parks & recreation advisory commission minutes of April 21, 2021 4o. Approve for filing planning commission minutes of June 16, 2021 4p. Approve for filing planning commission minutes of July 21, 2021 It was moved by Councilmember Dumalag, seconded by Councilmember Mohamed, to approve the agenda as presented and items listed on the consent calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and commissions 5a. Appointments to the Police Advisory and Environment & Sustainability Commissions It was moved by Councilmember Harris, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to appoint Joe Schermann to the Police Advisory Commission (PAC) for a term beginning Aug. 16, 2021 and ending May 31, 2022, and to appoint Andrew Willette to the Environmental & Sustainability Commission (ESC) for a term beginning Aug. 16, 2021 and ending May 31, 2023. The motion passed 7-0. 6. Public hearings - none 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – none 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions, and discussion items 8a. First reading of various amendments to Chapter 6 and Chapter 8 of the City Code City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3d) Page 4 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 Mr. Hoffman presented the staff report along with Mr. Pivec and Mr. Skallet. Councilmember Harris asked how many dog patio areas are in the community. Mr. Pivec stated he is aware of one. Mayor Spano stated it is at The Block restaurant. Councilmember Harris asked if the city or the county licenses this. Mr. Pivec stated the county ensures compliance and licensure of the health code under the authorization of the MN Dept. of Health, and the city will license the designated outdoor dog area. Compliance with MDH rules and regulations will be handled through the cty in conjunction with the county. Councilmember Harris asked if this change is necessary if the county is already doing this. Mr. Piv ec stated MN state statute allows food and beverage establishments to have a designated outdoor dog area provided the city issues a permit/license allowing them to do so. An initial inspection, prior to city licensure, is warranted to make sure there is compliance. Councilmember Dumalag asked about section 8 and the $15 fee per contractor and if this is $15 per company. Mr. Pivec stated there is a $15 fee per person/contractor. Councilmember Dumalag asked if other cities charge this and is reciprocal or per city. Mr. Skallet stated his license in Minneapolis was $25 and St. Paul was $30 for renewals. Councilmember Rog asked what feedback there has been from residents going door to door. Mr. Pivec stated he has not gotten any complaints on door-to-door sales. Councilmember Rog asked if a cat café was allowed in St. Louis Park. Mr. Pivec stated no, they are not allowed at this time. Councilmember Kraft asked related to dog licensing, if the city does not do permits, then there are no dog licenses allowed. Mr. Pivec stated if the permit is not completed, then there is no designated outdoor patio area for dogs allowed. Councilmember Kraft asked about the mechanical contractor change and if it will make it easier for staff. Mr. Skallet stated this does make it easier for staff to send out reminders to contractors. Councilmember Brausen asked if a private homeowner has a right to put up a no solicitor sign and then that bans anyone from coming to their property to solicit. Mr. Pivec stated that is correct. Councilmember Brausen asked if that applies to political candidates. Mr. Mattick stated this is a broad term and could involve those selling items or canvassing. He stated a sign works well and bans peddlers and solicitors. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3d) Page 5 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 Mayor Spano asked if any of this will lower the threshold of skills, training, or competency of contractors working in the city. Mr. Hoffman stated the city has a competency program for mechanical contractors, as the state does not have this. This requires licensure, bonding, and competency, and requires those working on-site to pass an exam and obtain a competency card. He noted this is an annual renewal. Councilmember Harris asked, based on the schedule of adoption, when the ordinance will take effect. Mr. Hoffman noted there is a typo on dates, which will be corrected. Councilmember Kraft asked about the solicitation and campaign question. He stated he researched and found that campaigning is not considered solicitation. Mr. Mattick stated canvassers fall under solicitor and the city has adopted the modified Green River approach. He noted there is no case law that addresses this, and no state statute that forbids campaigning at a property displaying a no solicitor sign. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mohamed, to approve the first reading of all five ordinances amending various sections of Chapters 6 and 8 of the City Code, establishing fees, and set the second reading for Sept. 20, 2021. The motion passed 7-0. 8b. Wat Promwachirayan (Wat Prom) conditional use permit amendment. Resolution No. 21-092 Ms. Kramer presented the staff report. Councilmember Rog stated she is supportive of the conditional use permit (CUP) amendment. She stated Wat Promwachirayan have been great community partners in Birchwood and the broader community. She stated there was significant neighborhood and community interest in the amendment to the CUP, specifically that there have been some issues with parking during events. She stated the city is working with Wat Prom on alternatives with parking and making sure emergency vehicles can pass. She added this CUP amendment allows Wat Prom to keep items on site, while also saving lots of hours of work. Councilmember Harris thanked Councilmember Rog for her nurturing of relationships with Wat Prom in the neighborhood. She asked about the addition and if it is grass or concrete now. Ms. Kramer stated it is grass now and will not impact their parking lot. Councilmember Harris asked if there is any stormwater treatment issue and if they are replacing greenscape with hardscape. Ms. Kramer stated stormwater will not be affected. Councilmember Harris asked if the 30 x 60 addition will impact the proposed development and water requirements. Ms. Kramer stated for this project there is no net City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3d) Page 6 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 change on pervious to impervious areas. She stated there would be no major impact on future stormwater projects. Councilmember Kraft stated he is supportive and noted he was able to sit in on a Wat Prom meeting recently with the neighborhood. He appreciates their commitment to the neighborhood and the growth they are seeing can bring change such as the parking issue, but when all come together to work through this, it can be worked out. It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Kraft, to approve Resolution No. 21-092, approving the amendment to the CUP at 2544 Highway 100. The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Mohamed was absent for the vote). 8c. First reading of ordinance pertaining to building readiness Mr. Pires, Mr. Hoffman, Police Chief Harcey, and Fire Chief Koering presented the staff report. Councilmember Rog asked on the public safety radio, will this apply to existing and future buildings. She is not clear on financial obligations of current small businesses. Chief Koering stated for most businesses in the city this is a non-issue. He stated this will refer more to large businesses made of concrete and steel and most have already been updated. This ordinance will help to keep this process in line going forward. Councilmember Rog asked for an example of a building currently not in compliance. Chief Koering stated there are no known businesses out of compliance. Councilmember Rog noted that parking structures and big open parking lots in the evening can both be concerning. She asked if there were any other considerations for parking outside of ramps. Chief Harcey stated the current lighting requirements are already in place for surface lots. He stated this could be included for future consideration. Councilmember Rog asked about what big items are coming next for possible technology applications to the city. Mr. Pires stated he believed artificial intelligence would be one, but what that looks like is still to be determined. He added this could have applications to environment and climate, for example. Councilmember Brausen is supportive and especially of the broadband requirements. He did express concerns on the minimum lighting and, given the city’s climate and emissions concerns, lighting alternatives should be investigated further including motion sensored lighting. Mr. Hoffman explained the state building code has a minimum of 1 foot candle for emergency exiting, which is very dim for security. City land use code has requirements for outdoor lots and ramps that affect neighbors, which are based on national minimums. He stated the ordinance tonight looks at only enclosed garages and ramps. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3d) Page 7 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 This is to provide enough light to see and if an incident occurred, to be able to see a license plate. He added in buildings, occupancy sensors for lighting are required for energy savings. Mr. Pires added streetlights will also become smarter and more safety-oriented over time, and the safety implications of this will need to be reviewed, coupled with privacy. Councilmember Kraft appreciated the presentation especially around the public safety aspect. He also liked how broadband agrees with the city’s climate goals and how fossil fuel emissions were reduced by folks working and learning at home. Councilmember Rog asked about lighting in ramps above the ground. Mr. Hoffman stated approvals have already been completed on the ramp lighting by council but could be discussed further. Councilmember Harris asked about the building at Excelsior and Monterey and if the safety features are already included there at Bridgewater Bank. Mr. Walther stated the electric vehicle and lighting elements were all included, and the only one not included may be the emergency call station. Councilmember Harris asked if there will be retrofits to any buildings to include more elements. Mr. Walther stated he is not aware of that at this time. Councilmember Harris asked what size of buildings require the megahertz feature. Chief Koering stated that would be hard to determine. He added as buildings are built, radio frequencies can be measured and addressed, but to say a certain square footage or height is difficult to do. He stated problems with this issue are usually rare. Councilmember Harris asked if retrofitting becomes a feasible next step, she encourages this in parking ramps where there are restaurants that serve alcohol. Mr. Walther stated the city’s focus is public ramps and commercial ramps that have these types of establishments. Councilmember Dumalag stated she is also supportive of this, especially the radio amplification. She added especially with concerns about responders responding efficiently. She asked if this would decrease landlords’ insurance premiums as these efficiencies are in place now. Chief Koering stated he is not aware of anything that would allow for this. He added this will just verify that this is happening within the city code. It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve first reading of ordinance amending chapters 6, 8, and 14 pertaining to building readiness for broadband, parking area safety, and public safety radio communications amplification and set second reading for Aug. 23, 2021. The motion passed 7-0. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3d) Page 8 Title: City council meeting minutes of August 16, 2021 9. Communications Mayor Spano welcomed Ms. Keller, new city manager, and stated the council looks forward to working with her. He also thanked Ms. Walsh for filling in as interim city manager these past two weeks. He added city staff was very capable during this interim time and thanked them for their leadership. Mayor Spano added his congratulations to folks who will be on the upcoming ballot for elections. It was noted the St. Louis Park Historical Society will host a cash-only book sale event on Aug. 21 from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. at the Milwaukee Road Depot. Ms. Keller thanked the council and staff for welcoming her today, her first day with the city. She stated she has been impressed with the thoughtful discussions, engagement of staff, and thanked them for making her feel part of the team. Councilmember Brausen also welcomed new city manager Ms. Keller. He thanked the election staff for their help as he filed for re -election. He expressed his disappointment in Ward 4 that no one else has filed so far, feels democracy thrives on choice, and encouraged people to apply. Councilmember Rog announced that on Sun., Aug. 22, from 11- 6 p.m., Wat Prom will host an event and encouraged ordering food online in advance. Councilmember Kraft announced the Harvest Festival is also on Sun., Aug. 22, at Aquila. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Minutes: 3e Unofficial minutes City council special study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota Aug. 16, 2021 The meeting convened at 5:45 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: none Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), Interim Deputy City Manager/Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Communications and Marketing Manager (Ms. Smith), Racial Equity Manager (Ms. Salaam) Guests: none 1.Racial equity and inclusion requirements for developers/developments requesting TIF Ms. Walsh noted this is a council-initiated discussion. Councilmember Dumalag stated the intent here is for developers to be partners with the city in this initiative. She noted this is centered around BIPOC owned businesses, as well as development executives of businesses coming to report to the city on their diversity programs and hiring practices. Councilmember Mohamed added she wants to be sure when the city gives TIF and dialogues with developers, that they are prioritizing racial equity and putting it at the forefront of their thoughts, similar to how the city prioritizes this. Councilmember Dumalag added many of these businesses are 2nd and 3rd generation owned and we are asking them to expand their network of who they do business with. Councilmember Harris stated this is a two-fold initiative with developers including BIPOC companies if they have not already. She noted this proposal provides an opportunity for the city to reach another strategic priority and she supports it. Councilmember Rog referenced the proposed participation goals and asked staff to discuss these and how they fit into this. Ms. Barton stated this is different than the inclusionary housing requirements approved by council. She continued it is more challenging to meet hiring goals, especially given the current economic conditions, but it is important to put them out there and it conveys the city’s expectations. Although it will not be a default of the contract if they don’t meet goals, we do want them to show progress towards the goals. Page 2 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3e) Title: Special study session minutes of August 16, 2021 Councilmember Rog asked how the city is proactive in looking for bids from BIPOC businesses. Ms. Walsh stated staff does reach out to women and BIPOC owned businesses and has a list that they reach out to. She stated they do everything they can to reach out to these businesses. Councilmember Rog asked the success rate here. Ms. Walsh stated it depends on the area and noted they are still struggling to find them in some areas. She stated staff does invite them to come to pre-bid meetings, so they can provide the appropriate bids. Councilmember Kraft appreciated this discussion and is supportive of this. He quoted from an article provided by staff and stated if there is a way to make this real, he is interested in real gains and not perceived gains that hit a number. He added getting more training for BIPOC businesses is also a concern and perhaps should be added to the city’s legislative priorities. Ms. Salaam added developing relationships with BIPOC and women-owned businesses and connecting with folks is important. Councilmember Brausen stated he has worked on this in the past and supports this. He has concerns about implementation and finding BIPOC companies that have the skill sets required. He stated businesses have a difficult time finding employees, but he agreed this needs to be put out there. Mayor Spano added BIPOC entrepreneurship and workforce diversity are areas he has worked with. He has some reservations on this, and while he likes the idea, feels it needs fine tuning. He stated the secretary of state’s office has a list of businesses where the ownership is immigrant or BIPOC, and what sector of the economy the business is in. He stated that list is $100, can be purchased by the city, and would be worth having to share with contractors. He would like to know what other cities are doing and look at this nationally. He stated it seems there are opportunities to dig deeper, and not only look at straight employee numbers. Mayor Spano added his concerns are that these are goals, not requirements, and if the city moved ahead with this, he would expect these would be requirements ultimately. Ms. Barton stated they will take council feedback, put together an informational handout and language for contracts, and bring it back to council for review. Councilmember Dumalag stated this is not only about hiring minority-owned businesses, and she is not sure about going to the state or county as they have their own requirements. Councilmember Rog stated she is supportive and the city needs to start somewhere. Councilmember Harris stated she is inspired in that this is community wealth-building for the BIPOC community, and she is pleased by these efforts. Councilmember Mohamed agreed with council comments, adding she agrees with making these requirements as well. Page 3 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3e) Title: Special study session minutes of August 16, 2021 The meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Minutes: 3f Unofficial minutes Special city council meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota Aug. 23, 2021 1.Call to order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 6:25 p.m. 1a. Roll call Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: none Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), Interim Deputy City Manager/Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Planning Manager (Mr. Walther) Communications and Marketing Manager (Ms. Smith) Guests: none 2.Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar 2a. Adopt Resolution No. 21-093 certifying the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) as an adequate examination of the environmental impacts and accepting the record of decision, declaring no need for an environmental impact statement for the Beltline Station Development project 2b. Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2625-21 amending chapters 6, 8 and 14 pertaining to building readiness for broadband, parking area safety, and public safety radio communications amplification and approve summary ordinance for publication It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve the agenda as presented and items listed on the consent calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 7-0. Councilmember Rog asked if all the recommendations related to the EAW will be implemented, including the MCWSD plan, Met Council design requirements, and MnDOT study on Highways 7 and 100. Mr. Walther stated two will be followed up on. The only item in question was an additional traffic study for Highways 7 and 100 by MnDOT, which will be part of planning and zoning reviews. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3f) Page 2 Title: Special city council meeting minutes of August 23, 2021 3. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Minutes: 3g Unofficial minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota Aug. 23, 2021 The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Lynette Dumalag, Rachel Harris, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: none Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), Interim Deputy City Manager/Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), CFO (Ms. Schmitt), CIO (Mr. Pires), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Planning Manager (Mr. Walther), Building and Energy Director (Mr. Hoffman), Sustainability Manager (Ms. Ziring), Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison) Guests: none 1. Neighborhood-focused commercial activity in public parks Councilmember Rog noted residents, Maria Nilgis and Alex Moen, from the Bronx Park neighborhood, had come to her with this idea. She stated this initial idea is not about their business, but to create public gathering spaces which align with the strategic plan and looking initially at Nelson Park. She stated this request addresses allowing some commercial business in neighborhood parks, like Tin Fish in Minneapolis, but on a smaller scale. She stated this would be a new way to use public spaces and it seems appropriate given the times. She stated this idea aligns as a subcategory under the strategic plan to create broad neighborhood development and promote small locally owned businesses and there is excitement about the potential here. Councilmember Rog stated currently there are food trucks at neighborhood events, which can be very community building. She added people love eating outdoors in tents at restaurants as well and the city just recently extended the tent policy for restaurants. She added residents also appreciate small businesses within the city. Councilmember Rog stated brick and mortar businesses would not be something to be discussed at this time, especially as the city has park shelters, some of which are underutilized. She would like to explore some semi-permanent facilities such as shipping containers, which can be very inviting spaces and are affordable for smaller businesses. She added there should be RFPs for equity residences and supportive funding for BIPOC, St. Louis Park owned businesses, and businesses with creative ideas. She asked which parks would be best for this and noted the program should be piloted first near the regional trails. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 2 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 Councilmember Rog added she would want to refer this to Park and Recreation and Planning commissions to get their input before proceeding. Councilmember Brausen stated he is not interested in spending any staff time on feasibility and costs of putting private commercial facilities in our parks. He continued this type of construction would require staff time and funding to study, and the comparison to Minneapolis Parks fails as they have a budget of $126 million yearly, while St. Louis Park’s Park and Rec is funded by the City at less than $7 million. He stated food trucks seem sensible and if a private entrepreneur wants to construct a container café on their own, he would be willing to consider this at their cost, but to use limited staff time on this seems like a misuse of city resources. He added he does not see how the city could fund the feasibility study given the current demands of the city’s budget. He stated he does not want to get into the business of selecting vendors and thinks the private market handles this just fine. Councilmember Rog agreed we should not be spending money on creating or erecting structures, and this is about supporting small business by allowing them in spaces where they currently are not allowed to meet demand. Councilmember Brausen stated he does not like spending staff time looking into the planning and zoning of such a project. Councilmember Kraft asked Councilmember Brausen about his being positive about a food truck or spending their own funds on a structure. Councilmember Brausen stated a willingness to consider if they did it on their own but does not support spending city staff time and funds on speculation that a vendor might want to construct a concept the city comes up with. It seems too speculative. Councilmember Kraft stated there would be staff time if there was a specific proposal. Councilmember Brausen agreed if there was a specific proposal, he would then not be opposed to it. Councilmember Dumalag stated she would be more interested in a food truck versus a structure. She noted there would be staff time spent on this, and as this is looked at through the lens of racial equity, there would need to be an even rotation versus a physical structure and lease arrangement. Councilmember Harris stated she found this idea invigorating and looking at neighborhood parks in a new way. She stated aligning with parks that have restroom facilities would be most appropriate. She would be more inclined at this point to support food trucks versus a structure. She added the community has 1 or 2 commercial kitchens that may be available to the public. For example, the Lenox made their kitchen available to a business that resulted in them opening a restaurant in St. Louis Park. She stated she could see a permit process as a way forward for food trucks or carts. Ms. Keller stated the food trucks can be permitted in the parks currently and can get more information to the council. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 3 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 Councilmember Mohamed stated she supports this, adding it would support the community vibrancy. She would not want anything to take away from the green space the parks currently have. She stated if a physical building were added to one of the city’s parks, she would want to be sure it would be across all parks. She is interested in looking at this further. Councilmember Kraft asked if trucks are allowed today. Councilmember Rog stated they are allowed, but they must leave at night. Councilmember Kraft stated he thought this was positive, but it does appear there are many intricacies to this, and he likes the idea of referring this to PRAC and asking for recommendations. He is interested in a pilot to keep staff time to a minimum, and he would want to have an electrical hook up versus gas. Mayor Spano stated Councilmember Rog said this is timely now and asked her to explain further. Councilmember Rog stated it is Covid time and folks prefer being outside for social experiences now. Mayor Spano asked why the parks. Councilmember Rog stated this was the idea of a couple in the community specifically for Nelson Park, near the trail, and with community gardens there, plus a lot of green space. She stated this was an idea for folks to come and hang out with their families for ice cream or hot cocoa. She added this made sense and it would then need to be institutionalized. Mayor Spano stated he read the proposal to be the city having a physical structure. Councilmember Rog stated the shipping container was another idea, and something the commercial vendor or business owner would be responsible for. She said this would be another idea for staff to investigate and come back with more details about. Councilmember Rog stated a semi-permanent structure would be a unique idea and also different from a food truck. Mayor Spano stated he sees the potential challenges here and has real concerns in the city investing any money in physical structures. For food trucks, being they are also licensed, and since he has experience with this in the City of St. Paul, he would 100% support this, while the city could market this and bring exposure to it. However, he did say the additional support and access to food trucks in St. Paul, brought on some concern from brick-and-mortar restaurants. Mayor Spano stated he would support food trucks but has concerns about using physical structures within city parks for this and then leasing them out to private businesses noting he would not want the city to become a landlord. Councilmember Rog stated she is not asking the city to fund this at all, or to build infrastructure. The request would be for leasing the land and asking staff to bring ideas back on the potential of this idea in the city. Mayor Spano stated he is not interested in shipping containers or semi-permanent structures in the parks as it becomes a lease arrangement with the city, and the county health department has to be involved. He added it feels like many layers. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 4 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 Councilmember Rog stated it would be the same rules as a restaurant within the city. Mayor Spano stated the city does not lease park land to businesses. Councilmember Kraft stated he is interested in the idea of a semi-permanent restaurant presence in a park and would like to have PRAC investigate this and make recommendations to the council. Councilmember Harris stated the city does have a special event permit for 14 days. Mr. Morrison stated yes, that is correct, but it is limited to 14 days per calendar year per property. Councilmember Harris stated various groups have asked for special event permits in the past and she is wondering if the best solution would be to have food trucks ask for a special event permit. Mr. Morrison stated food truck permits are issued to the property owner. The permit approves the specific location on the property and is good for the calendar year. The property owner can switch food vendors throughout the year without notifying the city as long as the truck stays in the approved location. The park and rec department issues permits for one-time events in the parks. It is the food truck operator’s responsibility to be properly licensed and maintained. Councilmember Harris stated she is in favor of staff looking into this further for having food trucks for an extended period of time, either permanent and/or RFP, she leaves this to staff or PRAC to work out. She believes it is an exciting notion which will activate parks and neighborhoods. Councilmember Brausen is opposed stating it will waste valuable staff time and will force the city to pick winners and losers, and there would be unintended consequences especially for folks who live near parks who don’t want it to be a commercial area. It goes beyond the city’s mission. Councilmember Mohamed is in favor of this. Councilmember Dumalag stated she is interested in looking at a pilot for this, and with no investment in semi-permanent structures. She noted if neighbors did not want to have these businesses in the parks near to where they lived, this would then allow the city to course correct if needed. Mayor Spano stated there is interest by council in having staff and/or PRAC looking into this further. Councilmember Rog stated there are folks who would be interested in pursuing this and support it themselves and it seems the idea is being a bit quashed, and she is a bit disappointed. She will look forward to staff’s report back to council. Ms. Keller stated the council’s question to staff is how can we better support individual food trucks having longevity in neighborhood parks. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 5 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 2. 2022 budget: info on CIP, debt, long-range financial planning, and preliminary levy request Ms. Schmitt presented the report. Councilmember Brausen asked if the two MSA projects were planned for Cedar Lake Road east of Louisiana Avenue and Louisiana Avenue, Nevada to Kentucky. Ms. Schmitt stated yes. Councilmember Kraft asked if this is a one-time expense for both of those projects. Ms. Schmitt stated that is correct. Councilmember Kraft asked if the levy impact is bonded. Ms. Schmitt stated the city gets state aid for that, but it depends and MSA money can be used to pay or reduce the debt down. She added this is why staff is asking council where they want to see the levy go, so staff can work it into the scope of the project. Ms. Schmitt stated the questions before council tonight are: • Support setting the 2022 preliminary tax levy at the historical range of 6-6.5% • Support setting the 2022 preliminary HRA levy at the maximum amount of .0185% of market value • Support establishing an EDA and setting a 2022 preliminary EDA levy of $500,000 • Support proposed 2021 fund assignments and transfers Additionally, Ms. Schmitt asked council for their feedback on the following two questions: • What target future levy increases should staff work toward while developing programs and policies? • As staff recommend future years’ usage of ARPA monies, is there interest in using dollars to buy down the levy or invest in other established city priorities? Councilmember Harris asked if there are dollar amounts included with the levy percentages. Ms. Schmitt stated not at this time, but staff can bring this back to the Sept. 13 meeting. Councilmember Kraft referenced the scenarios in the packet and asked if the levy incorporates getting monies in on an annual basis. Ms. Schmitt stated yes. Councilmember Kraft asked if the $1.2 million per year for MSA, will about $400-500,000 of this be used for MSA, and an additional $700,000 could go towards debt payment. Ms. Schmitt stated yes. Councilmember Kraft stated in the future, he would be interested in understanding how much can be fit into the current MSA and for 1 or 2 projects. He asked if what is coming to the city from TIF would be included in the expense budget. Ms. Schmitt stated that’s correct, but the tax base would increase if a district came off. She added this would be in the long-range financial plan but the next one doesn’t come off until 2026. Councilmember Kraft asked on pavement management how things look so far. Ms. Schmitt stated it’s looking good, but we are at the peak of construction season and some large invoices are starting to come in. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 6 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 Ms. Heiser stated this year there were competitive bids and there have not been any surprises thus far. Councilmember Kraft stated on future levy increases, the assumed baseline should go up with the rate of inflation plus business growth. He added this seems in the 3-4% range and this should be the baseline to aim for. Beyond that, it would go further if adding structures. Councilmember Kraft noted on the 6-6.5% preliminary tax levy he is comfortable with that range. He noted on proposed fund assignments he would ask how things are going and it seems like things are under budget. He added he is comfortable with that number but would want to know if it could be lowered. He noted for solar panels he is supportive of those on the Rec Center and in the parking lot as well. He stated he is less excited about $1.5 million for each of pavement management and sidewalk and trail funds adding he would like to see if this could be reduced. He is ok with the 2020 levy buydown. He noted he is interested with the ARPA funds what could be done on transformative types of investments around climate or race equity. On the HRA levy, he is supportive and on EDA it will be difficult for residents to understand, so he is not supportive of this now. He is for the climate investment monies but would rather have it as a regular line item only and not as an EDA levy. Councilmember Dumalag asked on the page 5 fund balance, if this is related to liquor license or construction permit. Ms. Schmitt stated it is and noted budget targets are being hit. Mr. Hoffman stated it is easy for building permit revenue to fluctuate plus or minus $1 million each year, so the city keeps a $500,000 balance in this fund so in a year if it comes in low, it doesn’t put the budget in a deficit, so it is a good buffer. Councilmember Dumalag asked about timing of projects and leveraging of funds. Ms. Heiser stated most capital streets projects are driven by condition. She added policies are when a project is looked at, we look at Living Street policies and set them up accordingly. Councilmember Dumalag asked if some projects were delayed due to Covid and if this was a qualifier here. Ms. Schmitt stated the city has lost a significant amount of revenue from 2019 to 2020 due to covid, so the city could use ARPA to pay for public safety salaries which would free up the levy for other areas. Councilmember Brausen stated he is supportive of the preliminary levy at 6-6.5% and the maximum increase for the HRA levy and supports the EDA levy of $500,000 to fund climate investment and related salaries in economic development and thinks this can be explained to constituents and they will understand. Councilmember Brausen stated his thoughts on future levies and use of ARPA funds targeted for stimulus, not long-term, and he supports use of these funds for capital projects. He stated constructions costs on Cedar Lake Road will not decrease and delaying any longer on these improvements for another decade will be very costly. He is, however, interested in what cost- savings would be on mill and overlay, but these roadways in Ward 4 are instrumental in maintaining an efficient pedestrian and bicycle-friendly roadway in this area. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 7 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 Councilmember Brausen stated he is okay with buying down some of the levy increases as the next 4 years look to be substantial. He noted the 2nd scenario is one he would support and would prefer the monies be spent on real public works and not the debt services. He supports the staff proposed fund balance transfers and redistribution. Councilmember Harris stated the HRA levy is one of the most important ways to pool money to build more affordable housing and is a wise use of resources. She stated she gets comments from residents to not increase taxes, while they appreciate the quality of life here. She stated with the three scenarios presented and based on feedback from Ward 3 residents, she will support the 5.7% levy increase, with the understanding it can go down, and it usually does, and added the ideal amount is 4.5% which was done last year. She did, however, note the 4.5% would create constraints with expenses of climate action plans, capital improvements, and road construction, all expensive endeavors. Councilmember Harris noted regarding the EDA, how was the pilot different from what is being proposed. Ms. Ziring noted they proposed another year of the solar sundown program, and really no change to the qualifications of the program. It would refer to both commercial and residential. Councilmember Harris stated it seems fitting to continue these efforts and she supports the $500,000 EDA levy. Councilmember Harris added she is in favor of transfers for pavement management and sidewalk and trail funds. She is also in favor of using ARPA monies here as well. She noted if the ARPA can be used to reduce upcoming expenses to households that is a wise use of funds. Councilmember Dumalag supports the 6-6.5% levy with the understanding it will go down. She noted for renters the greatest impact was in Class B this past year and wants to be sure this continues to be lifted up. She does also support the HRA levy at .0185% and the EDA levy as well. She is in favor of a dedicated restricted fund and the fund assignments, is interested in the community survey, and also supports the climate investment fund. She supports buying down the levy and also some allocations. Councilmember Rog asked about the development fund and if its primary purpose is to acquire properties for development. Ms. Barton stated yes, that is correct. Councilmember Rog noted she does not see acquisition of properties included and asked what resources will be available for this. Ms. Barton stated the EDA levy for staff salaries will help creating funding for acquisitions. Councilmember Rog asked if there are sufficient resources now and going forward. Ms. Barton stated some of the fund is tied up in land and there is $12 million in cash in the development fund for any acquisitions. She added it is a concern that ¾ of a million dollars is going out in staff salaries, so that gets depleted. Councilmember Rog referenced page 6 related to utility rates and asked how capital improvement project are related to utilities. Ms. Schmitt stated when a street is worked on and pipes are put in, utility funds take care of this. Water, sanitary and storm are from the utility funds, not the general fund. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 8 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 Councilmember Rog stated she would like a staff report on MSA roads. She stated generally she is supportive over time on Connect the Park. She asked the difference between the climate investment fund and the EDA levy to cover climate investments. Ms. Schmitt stated the $300,00 from the EDA levy goes into the climate investment fund. Councilmember Rog stated she would like the option of tax relief for the lowest income residents and explore this further. She asked why do we set the preliminary levy higher each year and then reduce it. Ms. Schmitt stated it is a good plan to leave extra in there in case something comes up. Councilmember Rog is supportive of the 6-6.5% levy and the HRA levy. She has concerns about folding salaries into levies and feels it should be part of the general fund. She would not support the EDA levy as described tonight and would want further discussion. She stated on fund assignments and the ARPA, she is not fully supportive of investing in levy buy-downs, especially with the ARPA funds. But generally, she is supportive of the fund balance recommendations made by staff. She wants to see a transformative investment with climate with the ARPA monies and hopes to see this soon. Councilmember Mohamed is supportive of 6-6.5% levy, especially in light of inflation and coming out of Covid. She also supports the HRA levy and the EDA as well. She noted for the fund assignments she does support this but shares similar concerns of Councilmember Kraft here. Regarding buying down the levy and the ARPA funds, she would support both as well as more investment in other city established priorities. Councilmember Kraft noted with the proposed EDA levy the split would be for 2022, $300,000 for climate and $200,000 for development salaries. He asked going forward how would these be split. Ms. Schmitt stated she would leave that to council as a policy decision and it depends on how these develop. Councilmember Kraft asked what kind of restrictions would be included, and if it would be commercial use only. Ms. Schmitt stated yes . Councilmember Kraft stated with the EDA levy he would prefer to have the monies for climate without restrictions. Councilmember Rog agreed with Councilmember Kraft on this. Councilmember Rog stated it is difficult for her to determine the levy and the more detailed information she can get from staff, the more helpful it would be. Mayor Spano stated he supports the EDA and HRA levies and the preliminary 6-6.5% levy. He added he supports the fund transfers and would support the long-range planning goals staff has presented as well. Councilmember Dumalag stated the EDA seems like a policy question that should be discussed, adding she is curious as to why salaries are included in the EDA. Councilmember Harris recalled that salaries could come from the general fund, which would increase the amount of levy each year and the balance in the fund would then be for projects. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 9 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 Ms. Barton will return with further information on the staff salaries for council discussion at a later date. Ms. Schmitt stated this will come before council again on Sept. 13 for further discussion. 3. Future study session agenda planning and prioritization Councilmember Rog stated she would like an update on the the Westwood Hills access funds. Additionally, the last policing discussion was in Feb., and she would like another discussion on that. Councilmember Kraft asked about getting a timeline and next steps on policing. He also would like to discuss city staff mask and vaccine mandates among staff and in city facilities. Mayor Spano stated there have been some questions raised by residents. He stated the Secretary of State of MN guidance is we do not deny a person to vote if not wearing a mask. He stated he is not ready to discuss a mandate for staff on this. Ms. Keller stated they are strongly encouraging staff to wear masks and working with the fire department on booster vaccines. Councilmember Brausen stated he is fine with the proposed agenda and asked about the agenda updates discussion, which is a priority and also the nature center access funding. Councilmember Harris stated the transportation commission presentation was to be on Sept. 27 and asked if that changed. Ms. Walsh stated she would look into this and get back to council. Councilmember Brausen stated the week of Labor Day there will be no meeting due to Rash Hashana holiday. Councilmember Kraft pointed out this summer the droughts, fires, and summer fires have been strong and climate crisis is here. The United Nations body sets goals on climate and describes scenarios. Up until now, they have not been very definitive, but this last report was very striking and definitive, and there is a limited window to do anything. He would like to discuss declaring a climate emergency in St. Louis Park and involve all of the community and provide leadership around the state, while also providing actionable steps such as a trans-formidable investment and coordinate with other communities. Councilmember Rog supports this discussion for a study session. Councilmember Dumalag is interested in discussing this and asked what does an emergency mean. Councilmember Kraft stated it is up to the council to determine what that means in St. Louis Park. He noted that both Minneapolis and Duluth have declared climate emergencies. Councilmember Harris stated when discussing policy questions, she likes to look at what problem are we trying to solve. She is supportive of having the conversation and welcomes other cities to have the same conversation quickly. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 3g) Page 10 Title: Study session minutes of August 23, 2021 Councilmember Mohamed is supportive as well but does not want this to be performative. Councilmember Brausen is also supportive of this discussion and noted it is the transcendent issue in front of all society now. Mayor Spano stated he is interested in the subject, but he would like a written staff report first before discussion to get a sense of this issue. He asked what would be different by declaring this that the city is not doing now. Councilmember Brausen referenced written report #5 and staff recommending $5.2 million of pay as you go TIF. He stated he supports this, which is consistent with city TIF policies and noted this will assist the SWLRT project with payback of 8 years and later, which will assist with affordable housing. Councilmember Dumalag added she was happy to see the addition of paragraph 9 related to our racial equity goals that the council previously discussed. Councilmember Kraft referenced the climate investment fund report and asked if there is a PR plan around it. He also asked about carbon banking and if this is above and beyond what we already do. He stated sometimes there are longer-term benefits that can be looked at. He stated fuel switching and heat pumps also need to be looked at more. Councilmember Rog noted on the 3450 TIF request, she is not satisfied with the 25 affordable units when only 6 units are two-bedroom and above. She is also not happy with the design here and thinks the council may have missed this with the developer. So if there is any opportunity to further discuss, she would like to do so. She added she will not support this TIF request. The meeting adjourned at 8:31 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 4 July 2021 monthly financial report 5. Business terms for redevelopment contract with Opus Development Company, LLC – Beltline Residences. 6. Climate Investment Fund proposed 2022 budget and policy. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4a Executive summary Title: Approval of city disbursements Recommended action: Motion to accept for filing city disbursement claims for the period of July 24 through August 27, 2021. Policy consideration: Does the city council desire to approve city disbursements in accordance with Section 6.11 – Disbursements – How Made, of the City’s Charter? Summary: The Finance Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the city council to review and approve. The attached reports show both City disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable. Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of the information follows the city’s charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: City d isbursements Prepared by: Kari Mahan, accounting clerk Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, chief f inancial officer Approve d by: Cindy Walsh , interim deputy city manager 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 45.00 MYSLAJEK, KEMP, & SPENCER BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 845.003CMACOMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 845.00 66.004 FRONT ENERGY SOLUTIONS BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL 66.00 2,500.00A HARD DAY'S NIGHT TRIBUTE TO THE BEATLE SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,500.00 268.93A-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 268.93 510.75AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 510.75 60.00ADAMS JOHN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 110.71ADLER SUSANNE & TODD REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 110.71 495.00ADVANCED ENG & ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 495.00SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 495.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,485.00 1.00AIR RITE BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 65.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL 66.00 8.75ALBERS JUSTIN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.75 250.00ALBERTSSON HANSEN ARCHITECTURE LTD MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 250.00 5.83ALBRECHT JESSICA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.83 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 2 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 6,778.20ALDEN POOL WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 6,778.20 1,776.00ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,776.00 1,894.65ALLIED BLACKTOP PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,894.65 235.00ALT-LEWIS MAGGIE VOLLEYBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 235.00 24.00ALTMAN ARIELLA FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 24.00 623.83AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 169.58POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 32.93POLICE G & A COMPUTER SUPPLIES 167.94FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 124.96FIRE OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 18.98CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 1,138.22 3,985.00AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 3,985.00 6.47AMERICAN WATERWORKS BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 260.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 266.47 25.00AMUNDSON CARTER SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 1,085.85ANCHOR SCIENTIFIC INC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,085.85 25.00ANDERSON JENNIFER PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 25.00ANDERSON, GUNNAR SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 3 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 3Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 25.00 45.00ANDRE-KNUDSEN IAN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 750.00ANGEL FOUNDATION RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 750.00 36.00ANGEL KATIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 36.00 2,100.00APWAGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES 375.00ENGINEERING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 525.00PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 75.00WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 75.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 3,150.00 603.75ARC DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS LLC IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 603.75 1,767.48ARCADIS US., INC.WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,767.48 48.00ASHARE SHAINA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 48.00 60.00ASHENMACHER MEGAN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 18.00ASP LINDSAY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 213.74ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 213.74 226.21ASPEN MILLS FIRE OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS 419.00FIRE OPERATIONS CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 1,394.23FIRE OPERATIONS UNIFORMS 2,039.44 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 4 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 4Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,120.00AT YOUTH PROGRAMS LLC.TENNIS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,120.00 1,306.28ATIR ELECTRIC CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,306.28 215.75ATOMIC RECYCLING FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 218.75FACILITIES MCTE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 434.50 144.00AUSCO DESIGN & MARKETING BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 144.00 417.50AXON ENTERPRISE, INC.POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 417.50 311.64BACHMANS PLYMOUTH BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 311.64 13,431.00BADGER STATE INSPECTION LLC WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET GENERAL 13,431.00 15.00BAI MANDY PUBLIC SKATING/HOCKEY ADMISS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 1.00BAILL MICHAEL BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 75.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL 76.00 1,800.00BAKER TILLY VIRCHOW KRAUSE, LLP BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,800.00 13.15BALL HOLLY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 13.15 120.00BALLS OUT VOLLEYBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 120.00 2,148.48BARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,148.48 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 5 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 5Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 8.00BARTLESON JENNIFER PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 1,460.00BARTON SAND & GRAVEL CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,460.00 25.76BASILL WILLY ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 25.76 75.93BATTERIES PLUS BULBS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 75.93 50.00BEACH STEPHANIE SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.00PLAYGROUNDSREFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 110.00SEASON PASSES REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 169.00 25.00BEAULIEU COLE SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 23.00BEDDAWI REEM INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 23.00 9.00BEERLING REBECCA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.00 25.00BENNETT CHRIS SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 9.00BERGAUS CHELSEA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.00 108.00BERGER BRADLEY SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 108.00 1,693.50BERGERSON CASWELL INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,693.50 15.00BERQUIST KACY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 6 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 6Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 53.33BILD SAM INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 53.33 50.00BINDER, EMILY SOCCER REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 2,275.00BIRNO BLAKE R.SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,275.00 124.05BISEK, KATHRYN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 124.05 2,600.00BLACKSTONE CONTRACTORS, LLC.STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,600.00 10.00BLEVINS KIRSTEN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 10.00BLISSETT HANA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 229.36BLIXRUD EILEEN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 229.36 5,904.02BLOCK BUILDERS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 5,904.02 50.00BLUEM JEFF SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 50.00BOEVE ALEX SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 206.64BOLINGER JACOB FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 206.64 105,924.20BOLTON & MENK INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 677.58PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 397.71WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 58.92SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 117.84STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 7 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 7Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 107,176.25 84.00BOMBERG JORDYN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 84.00 48.00BOONE REBECCA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 48.00 443.40BORCK HALEY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 443.40 8,020.00BORMANN CONSTRUCTION INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 1,300.00PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9,320.00 112.50BOSCAINO MARIA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 112.50 147.44BOYD RYAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 147.44 326.90BRANDNER ROBYN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 326.90 53.33BRAUER LEIGH ERIN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 53.33 8,005.00BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,213.35PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,474.65WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 806.72SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,086.93STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 13,586.65 455.79BREDEMUS HARDWARE COMPANY INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 880.00REC CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1,335.79 33.75BRENNA HEALY TENNIS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 33.75 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 8 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 8Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 27.00BRESSMAN EGAN FRANCES INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 27.00 60.00BRISSON JENNIFER PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 15.00BROWN JAY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 132.50BROWN NICO INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 132.50 105.11BROWN, JANIS REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 105.11 66.25BRUCEK LAUREN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.25 23.96BRUMMER REALTY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 23.96 270.59BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 270.59 15.00BULTER BRENT BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 150.00BUMP, SET, WHIFF VOLLEYBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 150.00 30.89BURKE MEGHAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 30.89 1.00BURNOMATIC, MOONEY, AND RIDLER BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 75.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL 76.00 250.00BUSCH KIMBERLY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 250.00 800.81BUSINESS ESSENTIALS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 9 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 9Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 95.66PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 143.49REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 712.97REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,752.93 42.00BUTTERFIELD ABBI FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 42.00 15,972.90CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES 66.00SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 16,038.90 1,980.10CANON FINANCIAL IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 287.10TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,267.20 4,166.00CARE RESOURCE CONNECTION FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,166.00 50.00CAREY CHRIS SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 24.00CARLOCK LISA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 24.00 150.00CARLSON LUKAS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 150.00 4.89CARLSON WILBERT WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 4.89 67.50CASSEM JACEY TENNIS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 67.50 151.88CASTANEDA LIZZU WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 151.88 2,559.68CDW GOVERNMENT INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 55.49CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 2,615.17 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 10 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 10Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 8,188.37CEDAR FOREST PRODUCTS GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 8,188.37 269.99CEDAR SMALL ENGINE PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SMALL TOOLS 269.99 450.00CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 267.69CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITIES MCTE G & A HEATING GAS 1,634.87FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS 1,439.89WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS 55.87REILLY G & A HEATING GAS 260.84SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS 27.25STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 365.15PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS 10,770.74REC CENTER BUILDING HEATING GAS 14,822.30 104.10CENTRAL MCGOWAN CONCESSIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 104.10 16,400.00CENTRAL PENSION FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT OTHER RETIREMENT 16,400.00 9,529.10CENTRAL SQUARE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES 77,642.26IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 33,275.25E-911 PROGRAM COMPUTER SERVICES 4,764.55TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 125,211.16 320.98CENTURY LINK CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 320.98 850.00CFS INSPECTIONS PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 850.00 236.25CHAZIN, ANDREA ELLEN STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 236.25 38.43CHECK MICHELLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 11 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 11Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 38.43 150.00CHEF MARSHALL O'BRIEN LLC FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING 150.00 318.64CHENEY ADAM BLDG & ENERGY G & A TRAINING 318.64 42.00CHENOWETH JENNIFER PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 42.00 18.00CHERNE JESSICA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 240.71CHINONGOZE KRISTINA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 240.71 25.00CHIRPICH PETE SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 257.25CHRISTENSEN CHERYL STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 257.25 150.00CHRISTENSEN NIKKI WOLFE PARK AMPHITHEATER REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 150.00 112.47CHRISTENSEN WANDA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 112.47 300.00CHRISTIAN JANA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 300.00 20.13CHRISTIANSEN JARED WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 20.13 225.00CHRISTOPHER STROM ARCHITECTS MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 779.00CHUX PRINT AQUATIC PARK G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 779.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 12 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 12Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 450.92CIMA COMPANIES INC NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.92 129.52CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 174.47FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 385.43AQUATIC PARK G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 372.42VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,061.84 817.50CITIES DIGITAL HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 817.50 54.85CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 244.12ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 379.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 156.94ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE 33.06ADMINISTRATION G & A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 21.10RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 358.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 294.00HUMAN RESOURCES TRAINING 150.00HUMAN RESOURCES SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 283.86HUMAN RESOURCES MEETING EXPENSE 57.29COMM & MARKETING G & A ADVERTISING 271.00ASSESSING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 80.00ASSESSING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 610.00FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 314.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 167.53COMM DEV G & A TRAINING 17.99POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,273.66POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 126.96POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 3,035.00POLICE G & A TRAINING 69.02POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE 92.24POLICE G & A LICENSES 33.87FIRE OPERATIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES 199.07FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 71.54FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 81.76FIRE OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS 139.95FIRE OPERATIONS UNIFORMS 658.47FIRE OPERATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 13.97FIRE OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 13 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 13Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 95.00FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING 3,666.79FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 65.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A LICENSES PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 210.00-TRAINING SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1,550.00WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 109.05SOLID WASTE G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 266.51CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 207.19ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 3,847.50ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING 7.52SOFTBALLGENERAL SUPPLIES 630.84YOUTH PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 165.62YOUTH PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 122.49YOUTH PROGRAMS TRAINING 112.83PLAYGROUNDSGENERAL SUPPLIES 675.00FABULOUS FRIDAYS GENERAL SUPPLIES 102.18ARTGENERAL SUPPLIES 38.67PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 272.90PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,919.99PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 13.97PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 77.42PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 144.53NATURAL RESOURCES G & A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 40.00NATURAL RESOURCES G & A TRAINING 275.63WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 21.45SUMMER CAMP GENERAL SUPPLIES 194.69REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 157.80INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 644.59INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 435.14AQUATIC PARK G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 106.42AQUATIC PARK G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 689.99POOL MONITORS GENERAL SUPPLIES 36.26CONCESSIONSGENERAL SUPPLIES 142.20VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LICENSES 25,913.42 79.00CLARK KELSEY FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 79.00 100.00CLASEMAN PAUL SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 100.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 14 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 14Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 150.00CLAUGHERTY SEAN SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 150.00 193.50COLBURN JACKIE STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 193.50 25.00COLE NIA SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 137.86COLEMAN JOEL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 137.86 20,095.94COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES 20,095.94 1,125.06COLLINS ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION CO INSTALLATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,252.32INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS 267.00PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,644.38 153.81COMCASTFIRE OPERATIONS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 115.33CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 42.88OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 29.94REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 341.96 1,398.58COMMERCIAL ASPHALT COMPANY PATCHING-PERMANENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 5,480.83WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 6,879.41 171.00COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHNOLOGIES INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 120.00CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 291.00 400.60CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 400.60 412.00CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP.REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 412.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 15 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 15Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 50.00COOPER JANSSEN SOCCER REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 800.00CORAZON CASA DE LARGE EVENTS - RENTAL FEE RENT REVENUE 800.00 18.00CORBETT MARIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 8,750.00CORNERSTONE ADVOCACY SERVICE POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,750.00 12,925.00COURT SURFACES & REPAIR, INC.PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 12,925.00 3,780.00CPEC 42078 ELMWOOD LLC STORM WATER UTILITY BAL SHEET GENERAL 3,780.00 78.00CRASS MEGAN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 4.00PUBLIC SKATING/HOCKEY ADMISS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 82.00 490.67CROWN MARKING INC.COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 490.67 955.53CROWN RENTAL - BURNSVILLE WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 126.38TREE MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 182.39REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,264.30 222.75CRUMP JANINE STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 222.75 10.00CRUZ ASHLEY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 3,000.00CTW GROUP, INC.ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 3,000.00 100.00CUBFACILITY ROOM RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 100.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 16 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 16Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 36.00CULP INGRID PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 36.00 803.63CUMMINS SALES AND SERVICE WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 897.57SEWER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,701.20 12,404.82CUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,449.91SSD 2 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,646.54SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,593.61SSD #4 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,650.52SSD #5 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,122.53SSD #6 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10,315.00BEAUTIFICATION/LANDSCAPE LANDSCAPING SERVICE 50,182.93 1,938.21CUSTOM REFRIGERATION INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,938.21 899.64CYALUME TECHNOLOGIES, INC.FIRE OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 899.64 97.20DALCO ENTERPRISES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 794.94SOLID WASTE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 892.14 5.00DANKWERTH MICHELLE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.00 33.75DAUB MARY TENNIS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 33.75 18.00DEAN KAREN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 13,960.92DEANS HOME SERVICE SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 13,960.92 55.00DEIGNAN EMMA SEASON PASSES REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 55.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 17 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 17Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 210.19DEL BEL BRANDON STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 210.19 10.00DEMING MONICA FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 66.00DEONARAIN KEMRAJ & NEELA BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 66.00 440.00DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 440.00 5,468.34DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 5,468.34 102.05DESHANE JAMES REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 448.12WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 550.17 298.00DH ATHLETICS LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 298.00 122.00DICK ZACHARY BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 122.00 9.00DIERS JAMES PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.00 239.89DIETRICK WILLIAM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 239.89 45.00DIOUF JENNIFER PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 20.00DIRECTOR OF LICENSING - VITAL RECORDS ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 20.00 55.00DISTRICT 5 BROOMBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 55.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 18 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 18Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 50.00DITTMER DEREK SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 18.00DIXON MOLLIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 8,000.00DJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 1,806.23PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9,806.23 3,318.80DO-GOOD.BIZ INC COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE 1,874.52COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 1,380.26ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,174.24SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 7,747.82 115.00DOOLEY EMILY PICNIC SHELTERS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 115.00 36.00DRIVER DAVID PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 36.00 10.00DRIVER ERICA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 53.33DRONG SAM INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 53.33 300.00DTN, LLC.PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 300.00 5,990.00DUCTS & CLEATS FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 5,990.00 32.97DYBEVIK SARAH NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 32.97 1,225.70ECM PUBLISHERS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES 1,225.70 114.00EDSTROM CHRISTINA SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 19 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 19Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 114.00 66.25EGGERS JENNIFER INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.25 1,725.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ESCROWS KNOLLWOOD - INDIRECT SOURCE PR 750.00ESCROWSCSM TRAFFIC STUDY/PLANNING 5,250.00ESCROWSSATURDAY PROP (S WOOD STATION) 1,200.00ESCROWSSEMBLE EXCAVATING 67.50BRIDGWALK HIA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,992.50 50.00EJF/IND METALS SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 451.81ELECTRIC PUMP INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 3,231.50PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,683.31 10.00ELFSTRAND AMY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 88.80SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 98.80 535.04EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 535.04 300.00ENGLE MICHAEL ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 300.00 20.00ENRIGHT LYNDA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 5,729.31ENTERPRISE FM TRUST EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT RENTAL EQUIPMENT 5,729.31 3,521.98ESO SOLUTIONS INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 3,521.98 1,954.00ESP INC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,954.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 20 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 20Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 7,802.24ESRIGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES 1,875.00SOLID WASTE G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 39,725.76TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 49,403.00 2,801.50ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 2,801.50 965.00ETTEL & FRANZ ROOFING CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 965.00 200.00EVANS CHRIS GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 50.00EVANSON BRADY SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 7,000.00EVERLAST REHAB WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 7,000.00 144.00EVERS KIM INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 144.00 504.67EXPRESSIMAGESOLID WASTE G&A OTHER 504.67 1,473.38FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 5.51VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,478.89 72.58FALNESS KEVIN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 72.58 18.00FARRAH JENNINGS PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 35.98FARRAR ERIC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 35.98 247.45FASTENAL COMPANY WATER UTILITY G&A SMALL TOOLS 247.45 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 21 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 21Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 190.00FEFFERMAN DEBORAH PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 190.00 626.12FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 626.12 12,279.82FERGUSON WATERWORKS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 174.96SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 12,454.78 95.47FERRELLGASREC CENTER BUILDING MOTOR FUELS 150.55VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MOTOR FUELS 246.02 65.00FFM, LLC.BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 65.00 1,375.00FIRE SAFETY USA INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 1,375.00 205.14FIRST ADVANTAGE HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 205.14 12,130.58FISCHER MINING LLC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 12,130.58 60.80FISCHER NICOLE SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.80 13,920.41FLAGSHIP RECREATION LLC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 6,334.00PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 20,254.41 25.00FLUECHTMANN KYLE SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 50.00FORSTER SAM SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 8.72FOSTER MICHAEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 22 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 22Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 8.72 15.00FOULKES MICHAEL BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 15.00FRANCIS ASHLEY FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 197.31FRANCOUAL JOANNE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 197.31 98.22FRATTALLONE'S/SAINT LOUIS PARK REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 98.22 209.25FREESE ROXENE STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 209.25 10.00FUCHS KATIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.00INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 76.00 47.00FURLICH BONNIE SEASON PASSES REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 47.00 31.00GAGE, MOLLY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 31.00 3,605.42GALLS, LLC - DBA UNIFORMS UNLIMITED POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 3,605.42 5.00GAMBLE SHELAGH PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.00 99.96GARCIA CHRISTOPHER WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 99.96 35,910.91GARLAND/DBS, INC.WATER UTILITY G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 35,910.91 45.00GARRETT BAHR BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 23 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 23Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 100.00GASNER MARK SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 100.00 115.00GELHAR KERRIE PICNIC SHELTERS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 115.00 60.00GERLACH STANA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 7,406.35GERTENSPARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 7,406.35 27.00GIESEN NATE KICKBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 27.00 20.00GILLES ANDY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 67.50TENNISREFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 87.50 964.52GILLES JACKY NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 964.52 26.50GILLMORE CANDICE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 26.50 20.00GINNIS BRIDGET PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 8,717.55-GL CONTRACTING INC SIDEWALK & TRAILS BAL SHT RETAINAGE PAYABLE 174,351.06SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 6,105.41-PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT B/S RETAINAGE PAYABLE 80,920.93PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 41,187.20STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 281,636.23 208.00GO PERMITS LLC BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 208.00 128.25GODFREY CLAIRE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 128.25 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 24 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 24Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 23.00GOLDSTEN MICHELLE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 23.00 161.00GOPHER STATE FIRE EQUIPMENT CO.REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 161.00 1,023.30GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,023.30 87.50GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATIONGENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET PREPAID EXPENSES 62.50FINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 150.00 143.63GRAFF CINDY STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 143.63 416.00GRAFING KERI PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 416.00 839.00GRAFIX SHOPPE INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS 839.00 108.08GRAINGER INC, WW GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 46.13PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 24.96GENERAL REPAIR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 179.17 350.00GRAMER BLAINE ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 350.00 407.95GRAY DARIUS RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A TRAINING 665.56NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,073.51 21.03GREIG JENNIFER WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 21.03 143.63GRIEP MITCHELL STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 143.63 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 25 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 25Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 20.00GRIFFIN KATIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 129.00GRINAGER SEBASTIAN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 129.00 1,100.00GS SYSTEMS, INC.WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1,100.00 9,115.00H & L MESABI GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 9,115.00 1,223.74HACH CO WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,223.74 50.00HACKEY MICHAELA SOCCER REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 45.00HAGERTY MAURA SOCCER REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 125.00HAHN AMANDA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 125.00 150.00HAHN QUENTIN VOLLEYBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 150.00 450.00HALE, WILLIAM SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 191.95HALL SYDNEY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 191.95 170.63HANSON JEFF STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 170.63 18.00HANSON LYNN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 244.02HARIG ERIKA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 244.02 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 26 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 26Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 150.00HARMSEN TERRIE PICNIC SHELTERS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 150.00 50.00HARRIS SAM SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 18.00HARSTON KARL PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 15.00HATTEN DEREK BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 10.00HAWES ADRIANE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 124.00HAWKINS EMILY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 124.00 41,476.01HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 4,868.52INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS 13,256.89AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 59,601.42 15.00HAYES KELLY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 1,500.00HAYO SHAI SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,500.00 238.00HEALY ANDY FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 100.00T-BALL/BASEBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 338.00 336.00HEATON JOEL REC CENTER BUILDING MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 336.00 351.55HEDBERG AGGREGATES INC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 351.55 169.40HEDBERG SUPPLY STORM WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 27 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 27Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 169.40 208.33HEDRICK JOHN ROC ICE RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 208.33 344.57HEIMKES MELISSA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 344.57 40.00HEINEN DAVID KICKBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 40.00 15.00HEISICK NICHOLAS BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 41.23HEISLER RYAN & RACHEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 41.23 16.00HELEN DANIELS PUBLIC SKATING/HOCKEY ADMISS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 16.00 80.00HELLAND MELISSA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 80.00 12.50HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENT & REAL ESTATE ASSESSING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12.50 203.00HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 7,500.00POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,289.70POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 3,406.08POLICE G & A JAIL/DETENTION SERVICES 2,602.30FIRE OPERATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 24.00HIA ADMIN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 66.57SUNSET RIDGE COLLECTED BY CITY 2,176.55WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12.00SEWER UTILITY G&A COLLECTED BY CITY 2,176.54SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,353.10STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,706.19PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 677.10PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 35,193.13 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 28 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 28Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 5,136.00HENNEPIN HEALTHCARE FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING 5,136.00 2,000.00HENRY HOME BUYER ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 2,000.00 25.00HERBST CHRIS SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 53.33HERMAN ALEXANDER INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 53.33 88.80HERMAN LIBA SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 88.80 209.25HEYER MARGARET STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 209.25 85.57HIRSCHMANN MARC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 85.57 371.32HOLFSTAD DANIEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 371.32 9.00HOLIDAY KALSANG PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.00 17,000.00HOLLYWOOD PYROTECHNICS INC HOLIDAY PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 17,000.00 122.59HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 50.23PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 22.97PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SMALL TOOLS 693.32WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 49.14PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 48.71PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 20.80PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 23.04PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,030.80 750.00HORINEK TOM RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 29 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 29Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 750.00 458.40HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY AQUATIC PARK MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 458.40 418.99HOTSY OF MN BLDG/GROUNDS OPS & MAINT BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 418.99 48.00HOWE BETSY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 48.00 15.00HOWELL KEVIN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 25.00HRTANEK ADAM SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 231.18HUNEKE MICHELLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 231.18 66.25HUNTLEY TIKKI INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.25 80.00HVIDSTEN LYNNE TENNIS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 80.00 1,785.00I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES 1,785.00 495.00ICCBLDG & ENERGY G & A TRAINING 495.00 3,587.73INDELCOWATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 3,587.73 720.00INDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 720.00 238.50INGLE LINDA STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 238.50 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 30 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 30Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,703.94INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 59.99GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,763.93 750.00ISRAEL, DANIEL SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 750.00 1,013.36I-STATE TRUCK CENTER GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 1,013.36 175.00IZABEL CATHERINE GOROWSKY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 175.00 30.88J & F REDDY RENTS BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 30.88 194.25JACKSON DIANE STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 32.00WINTER BREAK REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 226.25 500.00JACOBSON VIRGINIA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 235.00JACOBSON WILLIAM BLDG & ENERGY G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 235.00 285.75JAFFE KRISTIN STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 285.75 127.02JAMIL JIBRAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 127.02 15.00JANKOWSKI KAREN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 237.00JAQUA MAUREEN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 237.00 1,500.00JASKO AL STORM WATER UTILITY BAL SHEET GENERAL 1,500.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 31 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 31Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,000.00JEHLE ALYSSA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 1,000.00 102.05JENNINGS LINDA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 102.05 24.28JERRY'S HARDWARE FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 15.68POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 114.01WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 1.92WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 54.63PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 6.93PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 19.34PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 55.33WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 292.12 18.00JIRIK MICHELLE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 50.00JOHNSON BEN SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 66.25JOHNSON BRAD INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.25 280.00JOHNSON BRUCE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 280.00 188.81JOHNSON CLAIRE STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 188.81 45.00JOHNSON JOHNSON BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 150.00JOHNSON KELLAN VOLLEYBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 150.00 85.00JOHNSON LAUREN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 85.00 8.00JOHNSON MELISSA PUBLIC SKATING/HOCKEY ADMISS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 32 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 32Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 8.00 66.77JOHNSON, JAMES REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 66.77 85.00JOHNSTON LINDSAY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 85.00 118.00JONES DANIELLE SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 118.00 216.59JURHS TAYLORGRACE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 216.59 13,900.00JUST-RITE FENCE PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,900.00 5.83JUUL BRITTNEY PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.83 27.00KALPIN ELIZABETH PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 27.00 53.76KANE CHRIS ICE RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 53.76 500.00KASINSKI ANNA ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 500.00 168.38KAT SOLOMON KATHILYN STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 168.38 12.00KAUFMANN DANIELLE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 12.00 400.00KELLER KIM ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 400.00 383.89KELLOGG CHRIS FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 383.89 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 33 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 33Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 144.38KELLY CHAD STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 144.38 26.55KELSON MACKENZIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 26.55 217.90KENDALL COMMERCIAL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 217.90 20,089.76KENDELL SPECIALTIES GO BONDS - NATURE CENTER G&A BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 20,089.76 2,180.60KENNEDY & GRAVEN ESCROWS MSP REAL ESTATE - EDA 1,733.00ESCROWSKNOLLWOOD - INDIRECT SOURCE PR 220.00ESCROWSCSM TRAFFIC STUDY/PLANNING 463.60ESCROWSSEMBLE EXCAVATING 531.50ESCROWSPLACE 903.00ESCROWSBRIDGEWATER BNK / EXC MONTEREY 126.00MTKA BLVD PROPERTIES LEGAL SERVICES 6,157.70 1,973.50KFI ENGINEERS SUSTAINABILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,973.50 24.00KHAVANIN KILEY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 24.00 90.00KID ZONE EARLY LEARNING PICNIC SHELTERS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 90.00 36.00KIDCREATE STUDIO ART GENERAL SUPPLIES 36.00 580.00KILLER BREWS SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 580.00 10.00KIM EUNJI FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 119,870.88KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,288.93PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 34 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 34Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 3,866.80WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,866.80STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 128,893.41 13.00KINNEBERG SARAH PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 13.00 216.00KINNEY MATTHEW STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 216.00 130.57KIRCHNER, TODD NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 130.57 46.58KLANECKY BEN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 46.58 119.00KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 918.00PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 408.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,350.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 85.00SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 170.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,034.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 8,084.00 30.00KLINGENBERG DONNA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 30.00 60.00KNAUF SUZANNE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 53.33KOLPASHCHIKOV-CLARK LEO INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 53.33 430.00KONKOL ED GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 430.00 26.00KOOLEN ERIN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 26.00 14.77KOSA JOHN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 35 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 35Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 14.77 10.00KOSTIUK ANDREA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 80.75KRAMER & BRAD KJOS, DIANE REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 80.75 .70KRAMER MECHANICAL BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 89.50BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 90.20 337.00KRISS PREMIUM PRODUCTS INC REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 337.00 5.00KROELLS BRIDGETTE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.00 1,452.00KROOG, RACHAEL ADULT PROGRAMS PROGRAM REVENUE 1,312.00SOFTBALLPROGRAM REVENUE 2,764.00 280.00KRUEGER BECKY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 280.00 56.00KRUEGER KRISTY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 56.00 105.72KRUEGER, JULIANA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 105.72 8.63KRUGER JACK WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 8.63 14.00KUENDIG JESSE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 14.00 46,079.60LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES, INC.PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 46,079.60 75.53LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES INC POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 36 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 36Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 75.53 55.00LAPLANT JASON BROOMBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 55.00 .15LARISON JESSICA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS .15 45.00LARSON VANESSA HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 45.00 3,870.28LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES 3,870.28 60.80LE BLANC FREDERIQUE SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.80 45.00LE BRON DIAZ BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 45.00 1.00LEGACY RESTORATION LLC.BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 75.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 76.00 221.22LEVERNEZ SHANE REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 221.22 218.63LEWIS REBECCA STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 218.63 750.00LEXIPOL, LLC.FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 750.00 118.00LIESER MALISA SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 118.00 470.00LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 470.00 1,454.10LIFE SUPPORT INNOVATIONS FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,454.10 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 37 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 37Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 67.50LINDSKOG JODI TENNIS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 160.00SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 227.50 10.00LIPSCHULTZ MARTIN SEASON PASSES REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 10.00LITKEY ERIC PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 8.00LITTLE ELISE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 732.46LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 732.46 15.00LITTLE MEGAN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 96.00LOCKEN LINDSEY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 96.00 3,160.47LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES 3,160.47 258.24LOFFLERIT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 258.24 1,617.14LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,617.14 42,008.75LOGISIT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 750.00CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 92,059.23TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 134,817.98 64.40LOMBARDI, JIM ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 64.40 95.61LONG CARRIE REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 38 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 38Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 95.61 12.00LONG HENRY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 12.00 2,641.14LUBE-TECH & PARTNERS LLC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 347.28PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 327.89VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 3,316.31 262.31LY CALVIN STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 262.31 380.00LYON CARI PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 380.00 10.00LYONS KAREN FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 155.00MAASKE SARA BLDG & ENERGY G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 155.00 106.66MACALENA NICOLE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 106.66 50.00MACIEJ LEE SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 321.26MACQUEEN EQUIP CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 321.26 9.60MADICH BRIDGET FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.60 48.00MAGGIOTTO REED INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 48.00 4.00MAISTROVICH SARAH PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 4.00 300.00MALCOMSON KENT SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 39 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 39Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 300.00 44.20MALOVRH ADAM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 44.20 93.62MANNING, CATHERINE REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 93.62 36,613.61MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY OF GAINSVILLE, INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 36,613.61 1,250.00MARIE RIDGEWAY LICSW LLC POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,250.00 2,030.00MARK D WILLIAMS CUSTOM HOMES BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 2,030.00 375.00MARQUISEE ALISON GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 375.00 18.00MARTENSON NELS PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 110.00SEASON PASSES REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 128.00 48.00MARTIN RYAN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 48.00 30.00MARTINSON JOSEPH BLDG & ENERGY G & A COMPETENCY CARD/TEST 30.00 413.99MASCIOPINTO JOSEPH WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 413.99 100.00MATTSON TJ SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 100.00 3.00MAYER GINA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 3.00 7.50MCCABE KARIE PUBLIC SKATING/HOCKEY ADMISS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 7.50 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 40 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 40Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 28.43MCCONNELL, BECKY HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 28.43 26.92MCCORMICK DONALD WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 26.92 10.00MCCULLOUGH ROBYN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 60.00MCPHERSON SARAH INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 5.00MEILNER ISAAC PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.00 208.00MELENDEZ SHANA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 208.00 243.75MENARDSFACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 70.91GRAFFITI CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10.36INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 67.78PAINTINGOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 13.51PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 127.24WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 533.55 2,106.45MESSERLI & KRAMER EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT WAGE GARNISHMENTS 2,106.45 48.00METIL JILL INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 48.00 3,062.50METRO BLOOMS STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,062.50 26.81METRO LAKES HOLDING CO, LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 26.81 14,760.90METROPOLITAN COUNCIL BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 388,094.20OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 41 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 41Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 402,855.10 550.00MEYER BARBARA SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 550.00 42.49MEYERS KATELYN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 42.49 3.00MEZZENGA ANNE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 3.00 52.00MICKELSON TYLER BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 52.00 20,670.00MIDWEST GROUNDCOVER PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 20,670.00 60.00MIELKE CARRIE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 4.00MILLER BRADLEY PUBLIC SKATING/HOCKEY ADMISS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 4.00 83.82MILLER HUNTER WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 83.82 25.00MILLER MEREDITH SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 1,272.24MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT WAGE GARNISHMENTS 1,272.24 33,035.00MINNESOTA DEPT HEALTH WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 33,035.00 336.60MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 506.00CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 842.60 500.25MINNESOTA NATIVE LANDSCAPES TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 500.25 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 42 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 42Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 150.00MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY SEWER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 150.00 250.00MINNESOTA STATE OF POLICE G & A TRAINING 250.00 20,860.39MINNESOTA/WISCONSIN PLAYGROUND PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 20,860.39 100.00MINUTEMAN PRESS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 100.00 615.14MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM REPAIR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,086.02SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 1,204.51STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2.04PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 35.17WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 61.72SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 87.97STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,092.57 353.00MOBOTREXSYSTEM REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 353.00 70.00MOHR EMILY SEASON PASSES REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 70.00 180.69MOHRLANT CARL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 180.69 20.00MOIN LESLIE POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 20.00 224.00MOL JARED REC CENTER BUILDING MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 224.00 232.25MONCHAMP, MAUREEN & TIMOTHY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 232.25 256.00MONDL BRIAN SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 43 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 43Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 256.00 114.03MOORE JUDITH REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 114.03 268.75MOORHEAD YOUTH HOCKEY ICE RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 268.75 59.00MORNSON KARLA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 59.00 165.00MOSS & BARNETT CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 165.00 195.00MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 195.00 165.00MR CUTTING EDGE REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 165.00 690.00MRA-THE MANAGEMENT ASSOC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1,380.00WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 2,070.00 500.00MRWAWATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 500.00 1,995.00MSP COMMUNICATIONS COMM & MARKETING G & A ADVERTISING 1,995.00 981.56MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 981.56 152.20MULLEN CYNTHIA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 152.20 53.33MUMM TARA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 53.33 163.31MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPOSITORYFIRE OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS 163.31 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 44 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 44Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 92.49MURMAN GLORIA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 92.49 48.00MURRAY ROBERT INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 48.00 1,396.99NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 143.88POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 74.88SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 39.08REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 37.55VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 17.25GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,709.63 150.00NECKVATAL BETHANY GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 1.47NELSON TYLER WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 1.47 19.56N-E-P CORPORATION WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 19.56 199.19NERHEIM BRIAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 199.19 796.96NESCO LLC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 4,691.00CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 5,487.96 50.00NEUBERGER KRISTIN SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 24.00NORGAARD TARA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 24.00 195.00NORTH AMERICAN SAFETY INC HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 163.90PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 150.20NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 509.10 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 45 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 45Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 90.30NORTHERN AIRE POOLS INC SPLASH PAD MAINT - Oak Hill Pk GENERAL SUPPLIES 90.30 1,682.00NORTHLAND EXCAVATING LLC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,050.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 3,485.00INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS 6,217.00 66.25NYBERG MATTHEW INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.25 100.00NYGAARD COLLEEN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 100.00 3,918.41NYSTROM PUBLISHING ADMINISTRATION G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 3,918.41 624.50OAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 624.50 60.00OBRIEN ANN SEASON PASSES REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 40.00ODDEN MICHELLE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 40.00 20.00OFFERDAHL ERIN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 53.59OFFICE DEPOT ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 13.58RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 208.35HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES 98.49COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 137.76COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 108.74FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 258.62COMM DEV PLANNING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 286.96POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 119.17BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 128.79PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 57.74ENGINEERING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 46 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 46Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 167.77ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,639.56 120.00OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE COMM DEV G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 120.00 25.00OKEY MIKE SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 15.00OLEISKY ANDREA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 180.00OMAN ALLYSON WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 180.00 228.00ON SITE SANITATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,199.00FIELD MAINT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 110.00OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,537.00 450.00ORNSTEIN DAVID & ANDREA GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 4,160.73OVERHEAD DOOR CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 4,160.73 316.71OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 316.71 370.25PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC REILLY G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 370.25 254.12PALKERT CALEB WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 254.12 377.91PARK CHRYSLER JEEP GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 377.91 26.00PATEL FALGUNI PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 26.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 47 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 47Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 344.60PAUL MARY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 344.60 10.00PAULSON JOLENE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 20.00PEACOCK TRACEY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 270.00PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 290.00 50.00PEDERSEN LOGAN SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 220.00PEDERSON NICK WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 220.00 226.00PEDERSON RYAN SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 226.00 48.00PERIOLAT LINDSEY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 118.00SUMMER CAMP REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 166.00 .50PHANEUF BRIAN BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 82.50BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 83.00 129.13PHILLIPS TREE CARE LLC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 211.44WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 340.57 254.71PICKERING RODRIGUEZ RACHEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 254.71 36.00PIEPER JULIA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 36.00 10.00PLADSON KRISTIN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 20.00POMERLEAU KATHERINE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 48 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 48Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 20.00 691.32POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 691.32 107.26POOLER, AL REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 107.26 66.25POPOV KENDRA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.25 106.66POPOVA LEAH INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 106.66 240.00POTTER LUC PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 240.00 1.00POWERFULLY GREEN BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 200.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 201.00 193.55PRAIRIE CARE CHILD AND FAMILY FUND ROC DRY FLOOR RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 193.55 455.00PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,870.00BEAUTIFICATION / FLOWERS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,325.00 333.50PRECISE MRM, LLC.PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 333.50WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 333.50SEWER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 333.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 1,334.00 365.13PREMIUM WATERS INC FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 365.13 25.00PRICE JOHN SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 1.83PRIDE ELECTRIC BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 49 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 49Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 128.96BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 130.79 705.00PUMP & METER SERVICE VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 705.00 450.00PUTNAM JANET GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 450.00 6,869.42QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 6,869.42 60.32QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER GENERAL REPAIR POSTAGE 60.32 347.40R & R SPECIALTIES OF WISCONSIN, INC. REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 347.40 600.00R AND L CONSTRUCTION, LLC.PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00 66.00RABENSTEIN YEHUDA FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.00 1,626.85RAINBOW TREECARE NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,626.85 391.09RANDY'S ENVIORMENTAL SERVICES PARK MAINTENANCE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 390.39PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 845.13GRANTSGARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 1,626.61 235.00RANK EMILEE BLDG & ENERGY G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 235.00 747.82RATNER RACHEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 747.82 99.60RAY JEFF REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 99.60 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 50 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 50Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 13.00REBSTOCK KATHERINE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 13.00 400.00RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 400.00 40,754.78-REDSTONE CONSTRUCTION, LLC.SIDEWALK & TRAILS BAL SHT RETAINAGE PAYABLE 815,095.63SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 44,486.97-STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINAGE PAYABLE 645,918.36STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,605.00PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 118,652.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 121,563.97STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,619,593.21 12,656.45REFERRAL COLLISION INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS 154.58GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 12,811.03 288.00REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 288.00 79.00RENVALL ANNA FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 79.00 143.63REUBEN SARAH STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 143.63 40.00RHYNER JESSICA PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 40.00 875.00RICHARD ALAN PRODUCTIONS SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 875.00 9.00RICHARDSON STEPHANIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.00 26.70RIGID HITCH INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 26.70 86.00RISCHALL MICHAL INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 51 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 51Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 86.00 20.00RITTER JENNIFER PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 3,693.30RIVER CITY SUPPLY LLC FIRE OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 3,693.30 65.00ROBB'S ELECTRIC BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 65.00 279.54ROBERT B HILL CO REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 279.54 8,397.90ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,479.72FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 12,877.62 113.37ROCKET SOFTWARE INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 113.37 275.00ROGERS KATHERINE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 275.00 3.68ROOT TIFFANY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 3.68 50.00ROSEN ABBEY T-BALL/BASEBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 4.57ROSENBERG BRIAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 4.57 235.00ROSENBERGER TIM & MARISSA BLDG & ENERGY G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 235.00 9.33ROSSO KATE INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.33 2.00ROTO-ROOTER BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 200.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 52 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 52Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 202.00 7.69RUD JOSEPH WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 7.69 106.66RUSINOVA TEODORA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 106.66 52.85RYAN SCOTT WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 52.85 23.00RYCE SIMON INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 23.00 25.00RYSHAVY RYAN SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 15.00SAESAN SHANNON BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 460.00SAFEASSURE CONSULTANTS INC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A TRAINING 460.00 722.50SAFE-FAST, INC.WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 722.50 2,585.00SAMBATEK, INC.WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,585.00 36.48SAM'S CLUB ORGANIZED REC G & A INTEREST/FINANCE CHARGES 231.13CONCESSIONSCONCESSION SUPPLIES 267.61 4,998.00SAVATREETREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 4,998.00 48.00SCHAEFER RYAN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 48.00 20.00SCHILZ JULIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 53 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 53Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 206.17SCHNEIDER NICOLLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 206.17 132.50SCHOELLMAN MARY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 132.50 5.99SCHULZ DAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 5.99 72.69SCHWEIGERT AMY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 72.69 8.00SCROGGINS JULIE FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 86.00SEABORN MEREDITH INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 86.00 30.00SEDEY ROBIN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 30.00 990.88SEEDS FEEDS HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 990.88 186.00SETS DESIGN INC.POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 186.00 5.00SHACKLE BLAIR PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.00 1,030.00SHADYWOOD TREE EXPERTS & LANDSCAPING TREE DISEASE PRIVATE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 2,898.50TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 3,928.50 15.00SHAW ELIZABETH PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00 18.00SHEEHAN MATTHEW PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 54 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 54Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 26.00SHERIDAN ANNE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 26.00 25.00SHERLOCK JOSH SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 5,112.00SHITECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 5,112.00 1,029.19SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, INC.ESCROWS GENERAL 17,941.95SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 18,971.14 215.00SHRADER HANNAH INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 215.00 272.00SHRED-IT USA MINNEAPOLIS ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 19.42FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 565.08POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 253.48WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 18.52ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,128.50 83.55SIEGLE RYAN ORGANIZED REC G & A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 83.55 100.97SIGEL, MELVIN REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 100.97 5,420.00SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 1,753.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 7,173.00 7.00SILVERBERG GABRIEL PUBLIC SKATING/HOCKEY ADMISS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 7.00 66.25SIMS JERMYA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.25 13.00SINGH CAITLIN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 13.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 55 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 55Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 9.75SINNOTT PAUL PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.75 10.00SIPKINS ALISON FAMILY PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 10.00 46,972.00SIR LINES-A-LOT PERMANENT MARKINGS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 46,972.00 820.37SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 472.74IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,293.11 2,500.00SKAVANGER SCOTT ESCROWS DEMO / BROOKSIDE TRAFFIC 2,500.00 491.39SKELLY GABE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 491.39 64.05SKINNER PATRICK REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 64.05 206.00SLATTENGREN ERIN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 206.00 1,789.32SLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES 1,789.32 275.00SMITH DON WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 275.00 450.13SMITH LAURA HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 450.13 32.00SNYDER JENNIFER PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 32.00 110.00SONDRA TRYAN PICNIC SHELTERS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 110.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 56 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 56Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 4,204.83SPECIALIZED ENVIRONMENTAL TECH INC SOLID WASTE G&A YARD WASTE SERVICE 750.00NATURAL RESOURCES G & A LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 4,954.83 5.83SPENCER NIKI PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 5.83 131.78SPINK, PETER REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 131.78 576.49SPS COMPANIES INC FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 274.47WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 850.96 36,838.01SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 17,891.06STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 431.11WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,508.88SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,724.44STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 58,393.50 1,500.00ST LOUIS PARK POLICE EXPLORERS POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,500.00 13,647.00ST. LOUIS PARK HOUSING AUTHORITY KIDS IN THE PARK RENT ASSIST OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 13,647.00 50.00STAHL JILLIAN SOCCER REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 612.00STANLEY ACCESS TECH LLC REC CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 294.30REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 906.30 2,702.50STATE OF MINNESOTA ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES 2,702.50 59.26STENGLEIN JANET FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 59.26 161.06STEWART GEOFFREY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 57 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 57Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 161.06 25.00STORM JON SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 1,416.00STRAND MFG CO SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,416.00 2,447.46STREICHER'S POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 2,447.46 25.00STRUXNESS RICHARD SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 136.80STUTSMAN STUART WATER UTILITY G&A TRAINING 136.80 1,865.00SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 1,865.00 121.97SULLIVAN, LOIS REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 121.97 111.25SUMMIT COMPANIES FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 891.75FIRE OPERATIONS REPAIRS 1,003.00 12,371.19SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC REILLY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 12,371.19 1,931.00SUN CONTROL OF MINNESOTA INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,931.00 7.52SUNBERG AMERICA FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 7.52 350.00SWANSON FLO-SYSTEMS CO WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 350.00 300.00SWENSON ANGELA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 300.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 58 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 58Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 86.34SWISHER, SCOTT & MELISSA REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 86.34 17,640.64SYSCO-MINNESOTA INC CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES 17,640.64 8.00SZALAPSKI VANESSA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 7.88TABATT KYLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 7.88 25.00TANGEN NATHAN SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 261.65TAYLOR RYAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 261.65 20.00TEIGEN JAMIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 11.61TELELANGUAGE INC ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 11.61 34,336.24TENVOORDE FORD, INC.CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 34,336.24 156.34TERMINAL SUPPLY CO VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 382.12GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 538.46 850.69THE MPX GROUP COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 850.69 400.00THE PARK THEATER COMPANY SPECIAL EVENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 400.00 190.99THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CO GRAFFITI CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 190.99 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 59 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 59Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 2,334.55THE SIGN PRODUCERS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,334.55 200.40THE STANDARD ADMINISTRATION G & A LIFE INSURANCE 206.76ADMINISTRATION G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 64.65RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A LIFE INSURANCE 63.29RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 133.10HUMAN RESOURCES LIFE INSURANCE 130.18HUMAN RESOURCES LONG TERM DISABILITY 131.58COMM & MARKETING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 128.94COMM & MARKETING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 239.52IT G & A LIFE INSURANCE 262.24IT G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 205.86ASSESSING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 203.41ASSESSING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 260.73FINANCE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 259.56FINANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 545.84COMM DEV G & A LIFE INSURANCE 543.54COMM DEV G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 164.60FACILITIES MCTE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 160.92FACILITIES MCTE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 2,312.03POLICE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 2,280.31POLICE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 233.68COMMUNICATIONS/DISPATCH LIFE INSURANCE 229.00COMMUNICATIONS/DISPATCH LONG TERM DISABILITY 1,128.52FIRE OPERATIONS LIFE INSURANCE 1,118.60FIRE OPERATIONS LONG TERM DISABILITY 602.52BLDG & ENERGY G & A LIFE INSURANCE 638.20BLDG & ENERGY G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 68.32SUSTAINABILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 66.86SUSTAINABILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 138.68PUBLIC WORKS G & A LIFE INSURANCE 100.10PUBLIC WORKS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 500.35ENGINEERING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 513.11ENGINEERING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 497.58PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LIFE INSURANCE 498.42PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 105.66CABLE TV G & A LIFE INSURANCE 103.42CABLE TV G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 42.42HOUSING REHAB G & A LIFE INSURANCE 41.72HOUSING REHAB G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 60 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 60Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 237.50WATER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 234.08WATER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 146.82SEWER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 172.22SEWER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 93.72SOLID WASTE G&A LIFE INSURANCE 91.80SOLID WASTE G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 154.44STORM WATER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 123.06STORM WATER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 15,058.93EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A LIFE INSURANCE 264.16ORGANIZED REC G & A LIFE INSURANCE 269.06ORGANIZED REC G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 323.60PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 316.66PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 35.82NATURAL RESOURCES G & A LIFE INSURANCE 35.26NATURAL RESOURCES G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 147.06WESTWOOD G & A LIFE INSURANCE 143.98WESTWOOD G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 240.04REC CENTER SALARIES LIFE INSURANCE 235.16REC CENTER SALARIES LONG TERM DISABILITY 175.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LIFE INSURANCE 171.56VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 33,794.55 11,696.68THOMAS AND SONS CONSTRUCTION, INC. SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 32,046.04-STREET CAPITAL PROJ BAL SHEET RETAINAGE PAYABLE 483,251.57CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,112.50WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 76,675.00SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 66,185.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 608,874.71 113.54THOMAS JERRY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 113.54 50.00THOMAS RACHEL SOCCER REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 8.00THOMPSON HEIDI PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.00 16.00THOMPSON JAYE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 61 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 61Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 16.00 66.25THOMPSON, HOLLY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 66.25 319.98THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 319.98 65.00THORNE LAURA PARK BUILDINGS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 254.10THRIVEPASSEMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 254.10 3,800.00THURNBLOM DONALD ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 3,800.00 339.00TIFT LUKE PLAYGROUNDS MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 339.00 1,475.50TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 187.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 446.00SUSTAINABILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,108.50 669.00T-MOBILE CENTRAL LLC.WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET GENERAL 669.00 8.75TOBIAS SOPHIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 8.75 12.03TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 12.03 282.65TOLLEFSRUD ERIC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 282.65 29,895.00TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC MUNICIPAL BLDG IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 29,895.00 1,095.00TREES FOR LESS NURSERY POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 62 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 62Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,095.00 248.56TRI STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 3,190.00CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 3,438.56 795.00TRUE COLORS INTERNATIONAL RACE EQUITY & INCLUSION G&A TRAINING 795.00 93.55TUMILTY KATE REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 93.55 18.00TURCOTTE KRISTEN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 60.00TURNEY CHRISTOPHER INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 60.00TURNQUIST AUDREY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 5.00TUTTLE KELSEY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 14.00BASKETBALLREFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 19.00 2,500.00TWIN CITIES FILM FEST HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,500.00 606.00TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 606.00 258.93TWIN CITY SAW CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 258.93 425.00TWIN CITY WINDOW REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 425.00 4,723.00UHL CO INC RECREATION OUTDOOR CENTER OTHER 4,723.00 468.46ULINEREC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 63 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 63Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 468.46 60.00ULSTAD MARISSA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 60.00 4,403.04ULTIMATE SAFETY CONCEPTS INC FIRE OPERATIONS REPAIRS 4,403.04 1,097.25UNITED STATES TREASURY EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A HEALTH INSURANCE 1,097.25 146.96UNIVERSAL SPECIALTIES WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 146.96 180.00UNO DOS TRES COMMUNICATIONS POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 180.00 430.00US COMPOSTING COUNCIL SOLID WASTE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 430.00 25.00VAIL PLACE FACILITY ROOM RENTAL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 10,016.16VALLEY-RICH CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 10,016.16 3,648.00VALPAK OF MINNEAPOLIS / ST PAUL AQUATIC PARK G & A ADVERTISING 3,648.00 12.00VAN EPS STEPHANIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 12.00 9.00VAN GUILDER JULIE BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.00 1,411.56VAN PAPER COMPANY CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES 1,411.56 10.68VANCE NATHAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 10.68 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 64 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 64Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 20.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 20.00 100.08VERIZONSEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 22,924.27CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 23,024.35 207.00VERSINI DOMINIQUE STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 207.00 37.76VERVILLE BLAKE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 37.76 320.85VESSCO INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 320.85 680.00VETERAN ELECTRIC REC CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 185.00REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 865.00 1.80VICKERMAN ERIKA HALLOWEEN PARTY REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 1.80 2,042.93VIKING INDUSTRIAL CTR WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 2,042.93 7,416.00-VIKING PAINTING LLC WATER UTILITY BALANCE SHEET RETAINAGE PAYABLE 148,320.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 140,904.00 233.25VIOT REBECCA STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 233.25 5,329.36WALKER DESIGN STUDIO STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 22.96PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 195.26WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 195.26STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 5,742.84 2,000.00WALKER DISPLAY, INC.WESTWOOD G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 2,000.00 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 65 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 65Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 225.00WALLER ROBIN STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 50.00WALLIN ADAM SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 329.16WALSER CHRYSLER JEEP GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 329.16 70.33WALSH KELLY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 70.33 150.00WALTERS ELIZABETH VOLLEYBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 150.00 .91WALTERS JAMES WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS .91 27.00WANG AGATA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 27.00 1,847.25WARNING LITES OF MN INC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,017.20PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 265.00INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 3,129.45 80.00WARZETHA THOMAS BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 80.00 5,801.73WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 41,249.20-SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 227,494.97SOLID WASTE G&A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 79,956.72SOLID WASTE G&A RECYCLING SERVICE 51,083.46SOLID WASTE G&A YARD WASTE SERVICE 77,335.37SOLID WASTE G&A ORGANICS 400,423.05 6,364.24WATSON CO INC CONCESSIONS CONCESSION SUPPLIES 6,364.24 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 66 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 66Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 759.50WEBBER RECREATIONAL DESIGN PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 759.50 53.33WEIGEL JESSICA INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 53.33 82.70WEINBERG MICHOEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 82.70 55.00WEINBERGS TERROR IN THE NIGHT BROOMBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 55.00 152.80WELCH KATHERINE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 152.80 475.00WELLS PATRICK GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 475.00 1.00WEST END REMODELING BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 145.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 146.00 195.00WEST KARA PARK BUILDINGS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 195.00 79.00WEST MARY FITNESS PROGRAMS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 15.00BASKETBALLREFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 94.00 9.00WESTPHAL EMILY PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 9.00 137.34WESTPHAL NOEL BLDG & ENERGY G & A TRAINING 137.34 25.00WESTRICK JEREMY SOFTBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 25.00 199.80WHIPPER SNAPPER LAWN SERVICE PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 180.00WEED CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 379.80 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 67 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 67Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 36.00WHITTINGTON SARAH PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 36.00 105.11WHITTLESEY NANCY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 105.11 35.00WICKBERG COLLEEN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 35.00 17.82WIECHER KAITLIN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 17.82 326.48WILLENBRING, ANDY FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 326.48 59.11WILLIAMS SHAWN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 59.11 3,727.00WILSON CLARICE PRE-SCHOOL PROGRAMS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,727.00 48.71WINSUPPLY OF EDEN PRAIRIE RELAMPING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 48.71 700.00WOLLE EDUARDO ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 700.00 18.00WOOD ADELINA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 240.00WOODHULL AMANDA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 240.00 20.00WOZNIAK KATIE PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 20.00 134.00WRAP CITY GRAPHICS NATURAL RESOURCES G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 134.00 957.00WSB ASSOC INC ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 68 9/1/2021CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7:20:48R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 68Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 8/27/20217/24/2021 - Amount ObjectVendorBU Description 1,939.11STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 12,465.68PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9,972.54WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,108.05SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,216.12STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 28,658.50 13,989.22XCEL ENERGY FACILITIES MCTE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 19,447.87PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 106,779.24WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,205.24REILLY G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 4,215.69SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,575.43STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 7,212.87PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 114.85BRICK HOUSE (1324)ELECTRIC SERVICE 323.47WW RENTAL HOUSE (1322)ELECTRIC SERVICE 28,674.47REC CENTER BUILDING ELECTRIC SERVICE 183,538.35 144.00XIAOXI JANNSEN INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 144.00 327.48ZIEGLER INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 327.48 235.00ZILLOWBLDG & ENERGY G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 235.00 18.00ZONDERVAN ERIN PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 18.00 30.00ZUMWALDE AMELIA PLAYGROUNDS REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 30.00 314.63ZWEBER TIM STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 314.63 Report Totals 5,647,101.84 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 69 Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4b Executive summary Title: Resolution appointing election workers for the 2021 municipal and school district general election Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution appointing election workers for the November 2, 2021 municipal and school district general election . Policy consideration: None – the city council is required to formally appoint election workers under Minnesota election law and the St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter. Summary: MN Statute 204B.21, Subd. 2 and St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter section 4.03 provide that e lection workers for precincts shall be appointed by the governing body of the municipality at leas t 25 days before the election at which the workers will serve. Election workers are assigned to precincts based on availability, statutory party balance requirements, and the number required for each location to adequately serve voters. Some election workers are assigned to full day shifts while others opt to work half-day shifts. Election workers are required to declare a party affiliation with one of Minnesota’s four major political parties or declare that they will serve without affiliation. Those who serve without affiliation to a major political party are exempt from performing certain tasks at the polling place that are required by law to be performed by workers of differing major political parties . The resolution identifies individuals assigned to work at a polling place on November 2, 2021 as well as individuals who serve on the city’s absentee ballot board. All workers are required to complete at least two hours of training under state law. In St. Louis Park, many election workers attend multiple training sessions (total 4-6 hours of training) because they serve in a leadership or other specialized role on Election Day , or they assist with other elections activities such as early (absentee) voting or health care facility voting. Every effort is being made to ensure we are adequately staffed and prepared to provide excellent service to voters who choose to visit a polling place on Election Day. Increased health and safety protocols have been implemented in accordance with guidelines from the CDC and Minnesota Department of Health. We are fortunate to have a very dedicated group of people who are ready to work and committed to providing this vital service to the community . Elections staff is working closely with each polling place , our election workers, and our operations team to plan for safety and security and address concerns related to COVID-19. Financial or budget considerations: The 2021 budget includes the funds required to hire and train election workers Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Resolution Exhibit A Pre pared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh , interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4b ) Page 2 Title: Resolution appointing election workers for the 202 1 municipal and school district general election Resolution No. 21-___ Resolution appointing election workers for the 2021 municipal and school district general election Whereas, the municipal and school district general election will be held on November 2, 2021 at the following precinct locations: •Ward 1 Precinct 1 –St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. •Ward 1 Precinct 2 – Wat Thai of Minnesota, 2544 Hwy. 100 S. •Ward 1 Precinct 3 – St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. •Ward 1 Precinct 4 – Central Community Center, 6300 Walker St. •Ward 2 Precinct 5 – Union Congregational Church, 3700 Alabama Ave. S. •Ward 2 Precinct 6 – St. Louis Park Recreation Center, 3700 Monterey Dr. •Ward 2 Precinct 7 – Vista Lutheran Church, 4003 Wooddale Ave. S. •Ward 2 Precinct 8 – Aldersgate United Methodist Church, 3801 Wooddale Ave S •Ward 3 Precinct 9 – St. Louis Park Municipal Service Center, 7305 Oxford St. •Ward 3 Precinct 10 – Lenox Community Center, 6715 Minnetonka Blvd. •Ward 3 Precinct 11 – St. Louis Park Senior High School, 6425 33rd St. W. •Ward 3 Precinct 12 – Aquila Elementary School, 8500 31st St. W. •Ward 4 Precinct 13 – Westwood Lutheran Church, 9001 Cedar Lake Road •Ward 4 Precinct 14 – Park Harbor Church, 1615 Texas Ave. S. •Ward 4 Precinct 15 – Peace Presbyterian Church, 7624 Cedar Lake Road •Ward 4 Precinct 16 – St. Louis Park Middle School, 2025 Texas Ave. S. Whereas, as authorized by Minnesota Statute 204B.21, Subd. 2 and St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter section 4.03, election workers for precincts shall be appointed by the governing body of the municipality no later than 25 days before each election; and Now therefore be it resolved by the St. Louis Park City Council that the individuals named in Exhibit A and on file in the office of the city clerk are hereby appointed to serve as election workers, absentee ballot board members, or alternate workers for the 2021 municipal and school district general election ; and It is further resolved that as authorized under Minnesota Statute 204B.21, Subd. 2, the St. Louis Park City Council also appoints all members appointed to the Hennepin County absentee ballot board, under the direction of the Hennepin County Elections Manager, to serve as members of the St. Louis Park absentee ballot board; and Be it further resolved that the city clerk is authorized to make any substitutions or additions as deemed necessary. Revie wed for administration: Adopted by the city council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk General Election, Tuesday, November 2, 2021 St Louis Park W-1 P-01 P 1 - St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Theresa Ruttger Mark Schwartz Trina Levin Kelly Priadka Gerald Gunderson Tom Kukuk Marvin Mohr Barbara Resnick St Louis Park W-1 P-02 P 2 - Wat Thai of Minnesota, 2544 Hwy. 100 S., St Louis Park, MN 55426 Margaret Marek Katherine Kloehn Jane Ahrens Brent Cook Rich Thorne Cynthia Jones-Klausing Julia Davis St Louis Park W-1 P-03 P 3 - St Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd, St Louis Park, MN 55416 Barbara Ruhl, Ann Olson, Richard Erickson Dana Uhrig-Fox Suzanne Costello William Kenyon Kelly Munoz Hernandez St Louis Park W-1 P-04 P 4 - Central Community Center, 6300 Walker Street, St Louis Park, MN 55416 Mary Maynard Paul Martin Kim Curran-Moore Todd Hendrickson Nick Morgan St Louis Park W-2 P-05 P 5 - Union Congregational Church, 3700 Alabama Ave S, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Kay Drache David Richards Kathy Grose Thomas Lynch Eric Nevermann William Obert Phillip Erwin Irwin Schreiner Jeffrey Sibert St Louis Park W-2 P-06 P 6 - St Louis Park Recreation Center, 3700 Monterey Dr, St Louis Park, MN 55416 David Larson Exhibit A - Election workers 2021 municipal and school district election Page 1 of 4 Page 3 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4b ) Title: Resolution appointing election workers for the 202 1 municipal and school district general election Debra Wuebker Jeffrey Gershone Ellen Lewin Emmett Pokorny Emily Schwalen Gina Forneris Kathy Gremillion Patricia Burley St Louis Park W-2 P-07 P 7 - Vista Lutheran Church, 4003 Wooddale Ave., St Louis Park, MN 55416 Loren Botner Henry Solmer Amelia Merfeld Steve Nachtwey Joy Showalter Kim Bartels Mark Ennenga Claudia Johnston-Madison Cynthia Ridley, St Louis Park W-2 P-08 P 8 - Aldersgate Methodist Church, 3801 Wooddale Ave S, St Louis Park, MN 55416 Julie Manuel Marguerite Krause Kyle Hakala Kellie Hultgren Ross Penna Heather Mainella Karen Oelschlaeger St Louis Park W-3 P-09 P 9 - Municipal Service Center, 7305 Oxford St., St Louis Park, MN 55416 William Tape Christine Johnson Karne Nelson-Zilka Amanda Scott-Lerdal Elizabeth Stenglein Chris Clarke JoAnn Ridgway Ernest Tursich St Louis Park W-3 P-10 P10 - Lenox Community Center, 6715 Minnetonka Blvd, St Louis Park, MN 55426-3499 Judy Shapiro Martin Lee Stephan Gipp Jessica Knighton Cleo Wedge Terry Ruane Linda Thompson Christopher Wilhoit Jennifer Zimmerman St Louis Park W-3 P-11 P11 - St Louis Park Senior High School, 6425 33rd Street West, St Louis Park, MN 55426-3498 Janet Benson Page 2 of 4 Page 4 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4b ) Title: Resolution appointing election workers for the 202 1 municipal and school district general election Casey Merkwan Steven Erickson Joan Hjelmeland Gloria Murman Robert Estes St Louis Park W-3 P-12 P12 - Aquila Elementary School, 8500 31st Street W, St Louis Park, MN 55426 Jim Engelking Lauri Kraft Joseph Miatech Karen Tepley Susanne Mattison David Miller St Louis Park W-4 P-13 P13 - Westwood Lutheran Church, 9001 Cedar Lake Rd, St Louis Park, MN 55426 Angela Fischels Kathy Metzker Gary Berkovitz Patricia Campbell Jeanne Stevens Rande Garnett Brian Miklos Mary Obert Nicki Pretzer St Louis Park W-4 P-14 P14 - Park Harbor Church, 1615 Texas Ave So, St. Louis Park, MN 55426-2518 Lawrence Grose Mary (Gina) Soucheray Jim Brimeyer Kathryn Haertzen Kay Peltier Barb Person Mary Kay Conway RJ Twiford Barbara Wilensky Gay Urness St Louis Park W-4 P-15 P15 - Peace Presbyterian Church, 7624 Cedar Lake Rd So, St Louis Park, MN 55426 Roger Ruth Elaine Savick Juli Bergman Chaiya Isenberg Malisa Lieser Lonni Ranallo Mary Kaye Conery Mary Gosselin Kathleen Kane Barb Osfar Mary Smigleski St Louis Park W-4 P-16 P16 - St Louis Park Middle School, 2025 Texas Ave S, St Louis Park, MN 55426 Jeff Huebner Page 3 of 4 Page 5 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4b ) Title: Resolution appointing election workers for the 202 1 municipal and school district general election Greta Hanson, Anna Luckow Philip Coen-Pesch Bob Dummer Rafael Geretz Jeffrey Helseth Julie Weaver Page 4 of 4Printed: 9/15/2021 11:13 AM Absentee Ballot Board Members Joan Hjelmeland Mary Maynard Ann Olson Mary Wickersham Page 6 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4b ) Title: Resolution appointing election workers for the 202 1 municipal and school district general election Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4c Executive summary Title: 36th St reet and Wooddale Avenue improvements –contract amendment - Project No. 4022-6000 Recommended action: Motion to authorize execution of a contract amendment to a professional services contract with Bolton and Menk, Inc. in the amount of $598,297 for the 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue Improvements – City project 4022-6000. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to continue to implement the city’s Pavement Management Program? Summary: In 2022, road and utility improvements are proposed on 36th Street between Wooddale Avenue and Highway 100. Pavement improvements will also take place on Wooddale Avenue between 36th Street and the Highway 100 ramp. A consultant is needed for the final design and construction administration of this project. Bolton and Menk, Inc. has been very responsive completing the 30% plans for this project. They were also the consultant who designed the Cedar Lake Road Project in 2019. The scope of this project currently includes: •Pavement improvements on 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. •Construction of the two-way cycle track on the south side of 36th Street. See 30% plan s attached. •Increasing the size of the sanitary sewer on 36th Street to accommodate development capacity needs. •Watermain replacement on 36th Street. •All curb ramps within the corridor will be upgraded to meet the requirements of the American s with Disability Act (ADA). •Miscellaneous utility re habilitation . Financial or budget considerations: This project is included in the city’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2022. The estimate for the entire project is $6,658,625. Funding will be provided by a combination of TIF , utility funds and General Obligation Bonds (bikeway ). 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 Location map 30 % plans Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Sr. engineering project manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager Page 2 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4c) Title: 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements –contract amendment - Project No. 4022-6000 Discussion Background: The city council approved the preliminary layout of the 36th Street bikeway in 2019. Information regarding the bikeway was shared with the city council at the Sept. 23, 2019 study session, at the Oct. 7, 2019 public hear ing and during the Oct. 21, 2019 council action to approve the preliminary layout. The p ublic engagement for this project started in 2019. The primary focus of th e engagement was the bicycle facility along Monterey Drive, Beltline Boulevard, and 36th Street . An additional meeting was held in August 2021 to reengage the community on the project. This will be the third phase of bikeways in this area. See attached map for the phasing plan. •Phase 1 of the Monterey Drive, Beltline Boulevard, and 36th Street bikeways was constructed in 2020. •Phase 2 is currently under construction and will be complete in the late fall of 2021. •Phase 3, which is covered by this contract, will be constructed in 2022. 36th Street has an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 12,600. Wooddale Avenue’s traffic volume is 6,000 ADT. These streets serve many residents and businesses. Both roads are Municipal State Aid (MSA), which makes them eligible for using state aid funds. Due to funding availability and that much of this project is being driven by future development utility capacity needs, Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is being used to pay for most of this project. The project is being designed to meet state aid standard to qualify for funding on future projects. The 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue Improvement Project will include the following: •Pavement improvements on 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. •Construction of a two-way cycle track on the south side of 36th Street. See concept plan attached. •Increasing the size of the sanitary sewer on 36th Street to accommodate development capacity needs. •Watermain replacement on 36th Street. •All curb ramps within the corridor will be upgraded to meet the requirements of the American s with Disabilities Act (ADA). •Miscellaneous utility rehabilitation. Present considerations: Bolton & Menk, Inc. was awarded the original contract for this project on Feb. 1, 2021 for $229,444 to complete a feasibility report and 30% plans . This contract did not include final design or construction services. The reason for not including final design with the original contract is due to not having a clearly defined scope of work. Now that the plans are at 30%, the project scope is well defined and the consultant is able to give u s the cost to amend the project to provide final bid documents and construction administration. Page 3 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4c) Title: 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements –contract amendment - Project No. 4022-6000 Please see contract totals below. Amount Original Contract $229,444 Amendment #1 $598,297 Total Contract Amount $827,741 The estimated construction cost for this project is $5,300,000. The contract for design service s with this amendment will be 16% of the estimated construction cost. Industry standard for engineering costs on construction projects can range from 20% to 35%, depending on the complexity of the project. This price includes design and construction administrative services. Staff has a high expectation from the consultant for resident and business support and responsiveness. 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue are Municipal State Aid streets; there are many facets of the project that will require coordination with MnDOT, utility companies, and businesses. As a result, we believe that the contract cost is consistent with the scope and demands of this project. Proposed schedule : A significant amount of work is required to complete the final plans, acquire easements, and bid the project prior to the start of the 2022 construction season. Please see the proposed schedule below : 60 percent plans October 2021 90 percent design open house Approve plans and specs and authorize ad for bid Award contract January 2022 Feb. 7, 2022 Mar. 21, 2022 Construction April – October 2022 !( GWX GWX ?A@ 25 3 100 ZARTHANAVESPARK C E N TE R B L V D E X C E LS IO R BLVDSERVICE DR H I G H W A Y 7 RALEIGHAVESGRAND WAY 35TH ST W XENWOODAVESYOSEMITEAVESW O LFE PKWYSALEMAVESPARK C O M M O N S D RWO O D D A L E A VE XENWOODAVESW ALKERST36 1/2 STWYOSEMITEAVES PARK C O M M O N S D R GOODRICH AVE OXFORD ST LYNN AVE S HAMILTON ST 34TH ST WZARTHANAVES PRIVATE RDCAMERATA WAYWEBSTER AVE SMERID IAN LN 33RD ST W LYNNAVESWEBSTERAVESQUENTINAVESSER VI CE D R H I G H W A Y 7 YOSEMITEAVESWOODDALE AVE 33RD S T W P R IV A T E RDWEBSTERAVESUTICA AVES35TH ST W P A R K GL E N R D COUNTY ROA D 2 5 SERVIC ED R H IG H W A Y 7 0 500 1,000250 Feet ² Monterey DriveBeltline Boulevard& 36th StreetBikeway ImprovementsOverview Map 36TH ST W 2021 - BELTLINE BLVD2022 - 2 0 2 0 20 2 1 M O N T E R E Y D R Proposed Roundabout 2021 - 36TH ST W City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4c) Title: 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements –contract amendment - Project No. 4022-6000 Page 4 11' 11' + 2' 1 1 ' 1 1 ' 1 1 ' 11' 11' + 2' 11' + 2' 11' + 2' 11' 11' + 2' 8' + 2' BUS PULLOFF 10' BIKEWAY + 6' BUFFER 11' 1 1 ' 1 1 ' 1 1 'H:\STLP\0T4123806\CAD\C3D\Prelim\0T4123806_layout_concept.dwg 9/14/2021 4:49:35 PMR 36th & Wooddale Concept Layouts St. Louis Park 36th Street Page 1 of 2 June 28th 2021 WOODDAL E A V E ALABAMA AVEFEETSCALE 0 20 40 R WOODDAL E A V E YOSEMITE AVE8'x24' PARKING STALLS 5 STALLS PROPOSED (5 STALLS EXISTING) 8'x24' PARKING STALLS 7 STALLS PROPOSED (10 STALLS EXISTING) RELOCATE LIGHT POLE RELOCATE LIGHT POLE 3.5' MEDIAN + 1' CURB REACTION 11' + 2' 11' + 2' MOUNTABLE TRUCK APRON 36th STREET 36th STREET LEGEND ROADWAY / OFF-STREET BIKE LANES ON-STREET BIKE LANE NEW CURB & GUTTER / MEDIAN CLEAR ZONE / SIDEWALK NOTE: 31 PARKING STALLS PROVIDED FROM WOODDALE AVE TO TH 100 BRIDGE (6 PARKING STALLS LOST FROM EXISTING) City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4c) Title: 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements –contract amendment - Project No. 4022-6000 Page 5 11' 11' 10' SHARED USE PATH + 2' BUFFERS 11' 11' 11' 11' + 2' 11' 11' 11' + 2' 11' + 2' 10' BIKEWAY + 3' BUFFER 10' BIKEWAY + 3' BUFFER 170' STORAGE LENGTH 200' STORAGE LENGTH H:\STLP\0T4123806\CAD\C3D\Prelim\0T4123806_layout_concept.dwg 9/14/2021 4:50:14 PMR 36th & Wooddale Concept Layouts St. Louis Park 36th Street Page 2 of 2 June 28th 2021 FEETSCALE 0 20 40 R WEBSTER AVEMOVE BRIDGE BARRIER 5' NORTH NO MEDIAN REMOVALS NEEDED 7' EXISTING TRAILXENWOOD AVERELOCATE ART RELOCATE LIGHT POLE NEW PED RAMP RELOCATE LIGHT POLERELOCATE LIGHT POLE 8'x24' PARKING STALLS 5 STALLS PROPOSED (5 STALLS EXISTING) 666 SQ.FT SIDEWALK EASEMENT 6' SIDEWALK 9' PAR 8' PAR 8'x24' PARKING STALLS 8 STALLS PROPOSED (8 STALLS EXISTING) 8'x24' PARKING STALLS 6 STALLS PROPOSED (9 STALLS EXISTING) 36th STREET 36th STREET City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4c) Title: 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements –contract amendment - Project No. 4022-6000 Page 6 11'11' + 2'11' 11' 11'H:\STLP\0T4123806\CAD\C3D\Prelim\0T4123806_layout_concept.dwg 9/14/2021 4:51:33 PMR 36th & Wooddale Concept Layouts St. Louis Park Wooddale Ave June 28th 2021 FEETSCALE 0 20 40R 10' 11' 11' 10' 11' 11' 11' 10' 11' WOODDALE AVE WOODDALE A V E 150' STORAGE L E N G T H 100' STOR A G E L E N G T H 7' 7' 7' MOUNTABLE TRUCK APRON 55' STORAGE L E N G T H36th STREETOXFORD STTH100 ON-R A M P W O O D D A L E A V ETH100 OFF- R A MP 7' City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4c) Title: 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements –contract amendment - Project No. 4022-6000 Page 7 Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4d Executive summary Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Recommended action: Motion to approve the second reading of all five o rdinance s amending various sections of chapters 6 and 8 of the city code , establishing fees, and approve summary ordinances for publication. Policy consideration: Does Council wish to proceed with the ordinance amendments proposed for building regulations and business licensing? Summary: On August 16, 2021 city staff presented an overview of the proposed ordinance amendments. Following general discussion and clarification of correcting a typographic error in effective date, Council approved first reading of all five ordinances amending sections of chapters 6 and 8, and associated fee schedule. The amendments will: •Clarify city adoption of MN State Building Code language •Convert the mechanical contractor Certificate of Competency to an annual renewal, consistent with other licensing and eliminate submitting proof of continuing education. •Modifies the Peddler/solicitor requirements to reflect federal case law •Adopts MN Food Code provisions that will allow food and beverage establishments to establish a licensed designated outdoor dog area, allowing dogs to accompany patrons while being served. •Fee schedule amended to reflect associated ordinance changes above. F ollowing first reading, the city attorney identified formatting only errors in Sec. 8-578. These have also been corrected in the ordinance for second reading. Financial or budget considerations: No significant financial expenditures or revenue will occur due to these proposed revisions. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Ordinances and summary for publication Building code adoption Certificate of competency Peddler/solicitor Designated outdoor dog area Fee schedule Prepared by: Michael Pivec, property maintenance & licensing manager Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, director of building & e nergy Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 2 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Ordinance No.____-21 C ity of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code Section 6-66 and Section 6-67 (a) (1) relating to building The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: S ection 1. Section 6-66 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethough language as follows: Sec. 6-66. Minnesota State Building Code. (a)Adopted. The Minnesota State Building Code, established pursuant to M.S.A. §§ 16B.59 16B.75 362B.101- 362B.16, as it may be amended from time to time, is adopted in its entirety, as amended, as the building code for the city. The code is incorporated in this Code as if fully set out in this section. (b) Optional chapters adopted. As authorized by M.S.A. $ 16B.61, Minnesota Rule 1300.0060, as it may be amended from time to time , the following optional chapters of the Minnesota Rules are adopted: (1)Minnesota Rules Chapter 1306, Special Fire Protection Systems with selection of Section 1306.0020 Municipal Option, Subp. 2. (2) Minnesota Rules Chapter 13 3 5, Floodproofing Regulations, parts 13 3 5. 0600 1335.1200. (c)Application, administration and enforcement. The application, administration and enforcement of the state building code shall be in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 1300. (d) Violations. A violation of the state building code is a misdemeanor. Section 2. Section 6-67 (a) (1) of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 6-67. Permits. (a)Required. (1)The issuance of permits and the collection of permit fees shall be as authorized in M.S.A. § 16B.62, subd. 1326B.121 subd. 2, a s it may be amended from time to time. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 3 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First Reading August 16, 2021 Second Reading September 20, 2021 Date of Publication September 30, 2021 Date Ordinance takes effect October 15, 2021 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 4 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Summary for publication Ordinance No.____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code Section 6-66 and Section 6-67 (a) (1) relating to building This ordinance amends St. Louis Park City Code Section 6-66 and Section 6-67 (a) (1) for consistency with state statutes and regulations. A printed copy of the entire ordinance is available for inspection by any person during the City Clerk’s regular office hours. Approved for publication by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, this day of , 2021. City of St. Louis Park By: Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor: September 30, 2021. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 5 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Ordinance No. ____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code Section 8-115 regarding mechanical contractor’s certificate of competency The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. Section 8-115 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 8-115. Certificate of competency. (a) Any person may obtain a certificate of competency for each or all of the mechanical contractor's license endorsements upon completion and passing of a competency examination provided by the city for each of the endorsements, and following payment of the examination fee, which shall be set from time to time by the city and a schedule of such fees is listed in appendix A to this Code. The examinations will demonstrate the knowledge of codes and basic methods necessary for doing such work. An initial competency examination may be waived by the city for individuals that provide evidence of passing a competency testing program conducted by another governmental entity, where the testing program is determined to be substantially similar to the city's testing program. (b) The certificate of competency holder must renew competency every three years by completing the application and payment of the annual fee. by providing to the city proof of continuing education in mechanical codes with the renewal application and renewal application fee. To renew a certificate of competency, the person holding competency must either complete a minimum of six hours of approved education or retake the competency test for each of the endorsements applied for. The continuing education must pertain to the competency being renewed and may occur at any time during the competency term. Continuing education content must cover one or more of the following topics: (1) General principles of mechanical systems (2) Equipment testing and analysis (3) Mechanical codes and standards The continuing education requirement will be fulfilled by attending classes or seminars provided by trade organizations, public or private institutes of education, manufacturers, trade associations, independent testing and evaluation laboratories or governmental agencies. For individuals holding a certificate of competency with multiple competencies, the individual is not required to meet the minimum education requirement for each competency, a total of six hours of education relating to any and all competencies shall be sufficient, and payment of only one renewal fee for all competencies shall be required. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 6 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code (c) A certificate of competency shall be valid for the thre e calendar years following the year in which the certificate of competency was issued. Certificates of competency shall expire on December 31 of the third year of the issuance of such certificate of competency. (b) If the holder of a certificate of compe tency completes the requirements for any additional competencies, the city will add the competency to the certificate with no additional fee. The addition of competencies within the term of a certificate of competency will not change the expiration date of the original certificate of competency. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First Reading August 16, 2021 Second Reading September 20, 2021 Date of Publication September 30, 2021 Date Ordinance takes effect October 15, 2021 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 7 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Summary for publication Ordinance No. ____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code Section 8-115 regarding mechanical contractor’s certificate of competency This ordinance amends St. Louis Park City Code Chapter 8, Section 8-115 to require annual renewal of mechanical contractor’s certificate of competency. A printed copy of the entire ordinance is available for inspection by any person during the City Clerk’s regular office hours. Approved for publication by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, this day of , 2021. City of St. Louis Park By: Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor: September 30, 2021. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 8 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Ordinance No.____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code Section 8-1 definition of solicitor; amending Section 8-571 and Section 8-572 to remove the licensing requirement for solicitors; amending Section 8-573 to remove the fee requirement for solicitors; amending S ection 8 -574 to require confirmation of a complete license application within two (2) days of receipt; amending Section 8- 575 to remove reference to solicitor; amending Section 8-578 to eliminate restrictions on hours for conducting business; amending Section 8 -579 to correct a scrivener’s error; and adding Section 8-580 registration requirement for solicitors The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. St. Louis Park City Code Section 8-1 definition of “solicitor” is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 8-1. Definitions Solicitor means any person who goes from house to house, business to business, or any kind of place to place movement for the purpose of soliciting or taking or attempting to take orders for the purchase of any goods, wares, or merchandise, including magazines, books, periodicals or personal property of any nature whatsoever for delivery in the future, or orders for the performance of maintenance or repair services in or about the home or place of business, such as furnace cleaning, roof repair or blacktopping. It also means any person, except for a city resident canvassing his or her neighborhood, who canvasses, solicits or calls from house to house for contributions or support for any charitable, religious, civic, educational, philanthropic, social service, welfare , or organization. Section 2. Section 8-571 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 8-571 License required; exemptions. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in the business of peddler or solicitor within the City without first obtaining a license from the city; provided that the following are exempt from the provisions of this section: (1) Any person taking orders for goods sold by a political, religious, educational, or nonprofit organization as part of fundraising activities. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 9 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code (2) Any person selling or attempting to sell at wholesale any goods, wares, products, merchandise, or other personal property to a retail seller of the items being sold by the wholesaler. (3) Any person who sells or attempts to sell or takes or attempts to take orders for any product grown, produced, cultivated, or raised on any farm. (4) Any person who makes initial contacts with other people for the purpose of establishing or trying to establish a regular customer delivery route for the delivery of perishable food and dairy products, such as baked goods or milk. (5) Any person making deliveries of perishable food and dairy products to the customers on his or her established delivery route. (6) Any person making deliveries of newspapers, newsletters, or other similar publications on an established customer delivery route, when attempting to establish a regular delivery route, or when publications are delivered to the community at large. (7) Any person conducting the type of sale commonly known as garage sales, rummage sales, or estate sales. (8) Any person participating in an organized multi-person bazaar or flea market. (9) Any person conducting an auction as a properly licensed auctioneer. (10) Any officer of the court conducting a court-ordered sale. (b) Persons whose activities are exempted from the licensing requirement shall comply with any other applicable statutory or ordinance provision, including Section 8-578. Section 3. Section 8-572 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 8-572. Application. An application for a license shall be made at least fourteen (14) business days before the person desires to begin conducting a business operation within the city. Each individual seeking to conduct business as a peddler or solicitor shall complete an application. Application for a license shall be made on a form provided by the City which shall include the following information: (1) Full legal name; (2) Any and all other names under which the applicant has or does conduct business, or to which the applicant will officially answer to; (3) Physical description (i.e., hair color, eye color, height, weight, any distinguishing marks or features, and the like); (4) Permanent address and telephone number; (5) Temporary address and telephone number; (6) Full legal name of any and all business operations owned, managed, or operated by the applicant; (7) Brief description of the business or activity to be conducted and a general description of the items to be sold or the services to be provided; (8) If employe d, the name, address and telephone number of the employer; or if acting as an agent, the name, address and telephone number of the principal City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 10 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code who is being represented, with credentials in written form establishing the relationship and the authority of the employee or agent to act for the employer or principal, as the case may be; (9) Address and telephone numbers, including cellular phones and facsimile, of regular place of business, if any exists; (10) Hours, date(s) and locations in the City which the applicant intends to conduct business; (11) A copy of a current government issued identification and complete a license application addendum authorizing the city to conduct a criminal background investigation; (12) License plate number, registration information, vehicle identification number (VIN) and physical description for any vehicle to be used in conjunction with the business; (13) Any and all addresses and telephone numbers where the applicant can be reached while conducting business within the city; (14) A statement as to whether or not the applicant has been convicted within the last five (5) years of any felony, gross misdemeanor or misdemeanor for violating any state or federal statute or any local ordinance, other than minor traffic offenses; (15) A list of the three (3) most recent city or county locations where the applicant has conducted business as a peddler or solicitor; (16) Proof of possession of any license or permit that, under federal, state, or county law, regulation, or ordinance, is required to have in order to conduct the proposed business; and (17) Any and all additional information as may be deemed necessary by the Chief of Police. (18) The applicant shall have a continuing duty to immediately disclose to the city any change in the information supplied in the application. Section 4. Section 8-573 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 8-573. Fees. Except for solicitors engaged in Interstate Commerce, which are specifically exempted from paying any fee under this chapter, aAll applications for a license shall be accompanied by the fee set from time to time by the City and a schedule of such fee is listed in appendix A to this Code. Section 5. Section 8-574 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 8-574. Application review and license issuance. (a) Upon receipt of the application and payment of any required license fee, City will determine if the application is complete within two (2) business days. An application will be City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 11 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code considered complete if all required information is provided. If the City determines that the application is incomplete, the City must inform the applicant of the required, necessary information that is missing. If the application is complete, the City must order any investigation, including criminal background checks, necessary to verify the information provided with the application. Within fifteen (15) days of receiving a complete application the City will issue the license unless grounds exist for denying the license application under Sec. 8-575. (b) A license granted under this subdivision shall be valid for one year. (c) No license issued under this subdivision shall be transferred to any other person other than the person to whom the license was issued. Section 6. Section 8-575 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 8-575. Denial of license (a) The following shall be grounds for denying a peddler or solicitor license: (1) The failure of an applicant to truthfully provide any information requested by the city as part of the application process. (2) The failure of an applicant to sign the license application. (3) The failure of an applicant to pay the required fee at the time of application. (4) A conviction with the past five (5) years of the date of application for any violation of any federal or state statute or regulation, or of any local ordinance, which adversely reflects upon the person’s ability to conduct the business for which the license is being sought in a professional, honest and legal manner. Such violations shall include, but are not limited to, burglary, theft, larceny, swindling, fraud, unlawful business practices, and any form of actual or threatened physical harm against another person. (5) The revocation with the past five (5) years of any license issued to an applicant for the purpose of conducting business as a peddler, solicitor, or transient merchant. (6) Evidence of a bad business reputation of the applicant, or organization represented by the applicant, including, but not limited to, the existence of more than three (3) complaints against an applicant, or organization represented by the applicant, with the Better Business Bureau, the Office of the Minnesota Attorney General or other state attorney general, or other similar business or consumer rights office or agency, within the preceding twelve (12) months, or three (3) complaints filed with the city against an applicant, or organization represented by the applicant, within the preceding five (5) years. (7) Other good cause. (b) If the City denies the license application, the applicant must be notified in writing of the decision, the reason for denial and the applicant’s right to appeal the denial by requesting, within ten (10) days of receiving notice of denial, a hearing before the City Manager. The City Manager or designee shall hear the appeal within fifteen (15) days of the City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 12 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code date of the request for a hearing. The decision of the City Manager or designee shall be final and binding on all parties concerned. Section 7. Section 8-578 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strike through language as follows: Sec. 8-578. Activities prohibited. No peddler, solicitor, canvasser, or transient merchant shall conduct business in any of the following manners: (1) Call attention to business or goods by crying out, blowing a horn, ringing a bell, or making any loud or unusual noise. (2) Furnish false information or failing to furnish information as required for registration under this subdivision. (3) Sell merchandise or services, or solicit funds, by means of statements which the person making them knows or should know are false or misleading. (4) Sell merchandise which is not of merchantable quality or is not fit for the purpose for which the seller knows or has reason to know the merchandise is being purchased. (5) Obstructing the free flow of traffic, either vehicular or pedestrian, on any street, sidewalk, alleyway, or other public right-of-way. (6) Conducting business in a way as to create a threat to the health, safety, or welfare of any specific individual or the general public. (7) Conducting business before 9:00 am or after 8:00 pm. (87) Failing to provide proof of license, registration or identification when requested. (98) Using the license or registration of another person. (109) Making false or misleading statements about the products or services being sold, including untrue stateme nts of endorsement. No peddler, solicitor, or transient merchant shall claim to have the endorsement of the City solely based on the City having issued a license or registration to that person. (1110) Remaining on the property of another person after being requested to leave. (1211) Otherwise operating the business in any manner that a reasonable person would find obscene, threatening, intimidating or abusive. Section 8. Section 8-579 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Sec. 8-579. Entry upon premises unlawful. It shall be unlawful for any person while conducting the business of a peddler or solicitor to entered upon any premises in the City where the owner, occupant, or person legally in charge of the premises has posted, at the entry to the premises, or at the entry to the principal building on the premises, a sign bearing the words “No Peddlers,” “No Solicitors,” or words of similar import. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 13 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Section 9. The St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding Section 8-580 as follows: Sec. 8-580. Registration. (a) All solicitors shall be required to register with the City prior to engaging in those activities. Registration shall be made on the same form required for a license application, but no fee shall be required. Immediately upon completion of the registration form, the city clerk shall issue to the registrant a certificate of registration as proof of registration. Certificates of registration s hall be non- transferable. (b) Individuals that will be engaged in door-to-door advocacy shall not be required to register. Section 10. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its passage and publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First Reading August 16, 2021 Second Reading September 20, 2021 Date of Publication September 30, 2021 Date Ordinance takes effect October 15, 2021 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 14 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Summary for publication Ordinance No.____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code Section 8-1 definition of solicitor; amending Section 8-571 and Section 8-572 to remove the licensing requirement for solicitors; amending Section 8-573 to remove the fee requirement for solicitors; amending S ection 8 -574 to require confirmation of a complete license application within two (2) days of receipt; amending Section 8- 575 to remove reference to solicitor; amending Section 8-578 to eliminate restrictions on hours for conducting business; amending Section 8 -579 to correct a scrivener’s error; and adding Section 8-580 registration requirement for solicitors This ordinance amends Section 8-1 of the St. Louis Park City Code’s definition of “solicitor”; amends Section 8-571 and Section 8-572 to remove th e licensing requirement for solicitors; amends Section 8-573 to remove the fee requirement for solicitors; amends Section 8-574 to require confirmation of a complete license application within two (2) days of receipt; amends Section 8-575 to remove reference to solicitor; amends Section 8-578 to eliminate restrictions on hours for conducting business; amends Section 8-579 to correct a scrivener’s error; and adds Section 8-580 registration requirement for solicitors. A printed copy of the entire ordinance is available for inspection by any person during the City Clerk’s regular office hours. Approved for publication by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, this day of , 2021. City of St. Louis Park By: Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor: September 30, 2021. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 15 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Ordinance No.____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code Section 8.1 and adding Subdivision XV to Chapter 8, Article II, Division 3 to permit dogs on patios at food and beverage establishments The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. Section 8.1 of the St. Louis Park City Code is hereby amended by adding the following definitions: Designated outdoor dog area means a specifically identified and defined designated outdoor area where dogs are allowed to accompany individuals. Other person in charge means the agent of the proprietor authorized to perform administrative direction to and general supervision of the activities within a public place at any given time. Designated outdoor area means any area utilized for food or beverage service and consumption located on the licensed premises of a food or liquor establishment but shall not include any "indoor area" as that term is defined in Minnesota Statute Section 144.413. Food and beverage service establishment means a building, structure, enclosure, or any part of a building, structure, or enclosure used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be an operation that prepares, serves, or otherwise provides food or beverages, or both, for human consumption. Proprietor has the meaning specified by the Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act Rules, Minnesota Rules, part 4620.0100, subpart 13, as amended from time to time. Section 2. Chapter 8 Business and Licenses, Article II Licenses, Division 3. Businesses is hereby amended by adding Subdivision XV as follows: Subdivision XV. Designated Outdoor Dog Areas City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 16 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Sec. 8-465. Authorized uses. Licensed food and beverage service establishments may apply for a license for a designated outdoor dog area. Sec. 8-466. License required. No person shall operate or maintain any designated outdoor dog area within the city without first obtaining a license from the city. (a) The application shall provide the following information on a form provided by the city: (1) The name, location, and mailing address of the establishment; (2) The name, mailing address, and telephone contact information of the applicant; (3) A detailed site plan depicting the designated outdoor dog area; and (4) A description of the days of the week and hours of operation that patrons' dogs will be permitted in the designated outdoor dog areas. (b) A license for a designated outdoor dog area issued pursuant to this chapter may not be transferred to a subsequent business owner but shall expire automatically upon the transfer of establishment ownership. (c) Requested changes to an approved designated outdoor dog area may be permitted provided a new application is submitted for review. Sec. 8-467-General requirements. (a) Minimum requirements. A designated outdoor dog area shall comply with the following requirements: (1) Employees must be prohibited from touching, petting, or otherwise handling dogs; (2) Employees and patrons must not allow dogs to come into contact with serving dishes, utensils, tableware, linens, paper products, or any other items involved in food/beverage service operations; (3) Patrons must keep their dogs on a leash at all times and must keep their dogs under reasonable control; (4) Dogs must not be allowed on chairs, tables, or other furnishings; City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 17 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code (5) Dog waste must be cleaned immediately, disposed in a refuse container located outside the restaurant, and the area sanitized; (6) Doors between the restaurant and designated outdoor dog area must be solid exterior door with self -closing mechanism and may not be propped open; and (7) Dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs shall not be allowed. (b) Posting required. The requirements of section (a) above must be clearly printed on a sign or signs to be posted within the designated dog area in a manner and place that is conspicuous to employees and patrons. Additionally, a clearly printed sign shall be posted within the entry of the establishment that indicates where dogs are allowed on the premises. (c) Access. Dogs shall enter and exit the designated outdoor dog area directly from the outdoors without passing through any portion of the building not approved as a designated outdoor dog area. (d) Service animals. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to limit: (1) The right of a person with disabilities to access places of public accommodation while accompanied by a service animal as provided in Minnesota Statute Sections 256C.02 and 363A.19; or (2) The lawful use of a service animal by a licensed peace officer. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First Reading August 16, 2021 Second Reading September 20, 2021 Date of Publication September 30, 2021 Date Ordinance takes effect October 15, 2021 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 18 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Summary for publication Ordinance No.____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending St. Louis Park City Code Section 8.1 and adding Subdivision XV to Chapter 8, Article II, Division 3 to permit dogs on patios at food and beverage establishments This ordinance amends Section 8.1 of the City Code to add definitions for “Designated outdoor dog area”, “Other person in charge”, “Designated outdoor area”, and “Proprietor”. The ordinance also adds Subdivision XV to Chapter 8, Article II, Division 3 of the City Code to provide for licensing of food and beverage establishments that permit dogs in designated outdoor areas. A printed copy of the entire ordinance is available for inspection by any person during the City Clerk’s regular office hours. Approved for publication by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, this day of , 2021 City of St. Louis Park By: Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor: September 30, 2021. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 19 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Ordinance No.____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending the St. Louis Park City Code Appendix A – 2021 fee schedule Whereas, the City’s fee schedule for 2021 is set forth in St. Louis Park City Code Appendix A; and Whereas, the City desires to change the renewal period and fee for mechanical competency; and Whereas, the City desires to change the registration fee for solicitors; Now, therefore, the City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. The City of St. Louis Park City Code Appendix A – 2021 Fee Schedule Building & Energy Department Section is hereby amended by adding the underlined language and deleting the strikethrough language as follows: Business Licenses Design ated outdoor dog area $50 Competency Exam Fees Mechanical per test $30 Renewal 31 year mechanical $3015 Solicitor/Peddler Registration $150 Lost ID Replacement fee $25 Solicitor Registration $0 Section. 3. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its passage and publication. First Reading August 16, 2021 Second Reading September 20, 2021 Date of Publication September 30, 2021 Date Ordinance takes effect October 15, 2021 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 20 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4d ) Page 21 Title: Second reading of various amendments to chapter 6 and chapter 8 of the city code Summary for publication Ordinance No.____-21 City of St. Louis Park Hennepin County, Minnesota An ordinance amending the St. Louis Park City Code Appendix A – 2021 fee schedule Notice is hereby given that on , 2021 Ordinance No. -21 was adopted by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. Notice is further given that because of the lengthy nature of Ordinance No. -21 the following summary of the ordinance has been prepared for publication. Ordinance No. -21 amends the City Code Appendix A - 2021 Fee Schedule by establishing a $50 fee for a license for a designated outdoor dog area at a licensed food and beverage establishment; and requiring a one year renewal fee of $15 for a mechanical competency exam; a peddler registration fee of $150; and no fee to register as a solicitor. A printed copy of the entire ordinance is available for inspection by any person during the City Clerk ’s regular office hours. Approved for publication by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, this ___ day of , 2021. City of St. Louis Park By: Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor: September 30, 2021. Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4e Executive summary Title: Resolution relating to transfer of pooled tax increment to city’s affordable housing trust fund Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving special legislation relating to the transfer of pooled tax increment into the city’s affordable housing trust fund. Policy consideration: Does the council wish to approve the sp ecial legislation allowing th e city to deposit pooled tax increment for affordable housing into the city’s affordable housing trust fund? Summary: In t he 2021 legislative sp ecial s ession, the M inn esota S tate Legislature approv ed La ws 2021, 1st Sp ecial S ession, Chapter 14, Article 9, Section 5, relating to the transfer of pooled tax increment to the city’s affordable housing trust f und (AHTF). This legislation was granted to the citi es of St. Louis Park, Minnetonka, and Richfi eld, allowing the t hree cities to deposit pooled tax increment into their respective affordable housing trust funds to be utilized per the AHTF guid elin es until D ecemb er 31, 2026. The city is required to adopt a Resolution approving the sp ecial legislation , along w ith a Certificate of Approval of Sp ecial Law , prior to the start of the 2022 legislative s ession in o rder for the sp ecial law to be implemented. Staff recommends the council adopt the Resolution approving the Special Law and authorizing the city clerk to f ile a certified copy of the Resolution and Certificate of Approval with the Secretary of State Financial or budget considerations: By impl ementing the sp ecial law , the city could transfer up to $7.8 m illion in pooled tax increment into its A HTF through Decemb er 31, 2026. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion Resolution C ertificat e Prepared by: Karen Barton, community development director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4e ) Page 2 Title: Resolution relating to transfer of pooled tax increment to city’s affordable housing trust fund Discussion Background: The city council created an affordable housing trust fund (AHTF) in 2018 to facilitate the development and preservation of affordable rental and ownership housing in St. Louis Park . In 2019, the city council authorized the pooling of tax increment for affordable housing to be used in conjunction with the AHTF. Under current laws, pooled tax increment (TIF) must be maintained in a separate account, used in compliance with TIF laws, and reported on annually to the State. The se requirements reduce the flexibility to meet the city’s affordable housing goals and are more administratively cumbersome and costly. Most of the city’s pooled TIF for affordable housing comes from TIF districts that have more restrictive requirements, limiting the use of the pooled TIF to new-construction rental housing serving 50-60% area median income households (AMI) only. This limits the amount of funding the city has available to create more deeply affordable housing below 50% AMI and affordable ownership opportunities and programs. Present considerations: Staff, working with consultants, legislative lobbyists, State Legislators and Senators, pursued special legislation to allow pooled tax increment for affordable housing to be deposited into the city’s affordable housing trust fund and to utiliz e those funds per the AHTF guidelines . The special legislation was passed as part of the State’s 2021 Omnibus Tax Bill as a pilot program for the cities of St. Louis Park, Minnetonka, and Richfield through December 31, 2026: 1st Special Session, Chapter 14, Article 9, Section 5. Cities of Minnetonka, Richfield, and St. Louis Park; temporary transfer of increment authorized. Authorizes the cities of Minnetonka, Richfield, and St. Louis Park to transfer tax increment accumulated for housing development to the city’s housing trust fund established under Minnesota Statutes, section 462C.16. Once transferred, increment is not subject to income or rent restrictions required for housing development under tax increment financing laws. Increment transferred under this section, however, may only be used to make grants, loans, and loan guarantees for the development, rehabilitation, or financing of housing, or to match other funds from federal, state, or private resources for housing projects. The authority to make transfers under this section expires December 31, 2026, and transfers are subject to reporting requirements. All three cities must submit an expenditure report to the legislature by February 1, 2024 and 2026. Effective upon local approval and filin g requirements. This special legislation allows the city significantly more flexibility to use the pooled tax increment for more deeply affordable housing and for ownership opportunities and programs. Additionally, this removes the administrative costs and burden of maintaining separate funds and annual reporting to the State. Next steps: Upon adoption of the Resolution Approving Special Legislation Relating to the Transfer of Pooled Tax Increment to the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund by the city council, pooled tax increment for affordable housing will be deposited into the city’s affordable housing trust fund for use on qualifying programs and projects. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4e ) Page 3 Title: Resolution relating to transfer of pooled tax increment to city’s affordable housing trust fund Resolution No. 21-____ Resolution approving Laws 2021, 1st Special Session, Chapter 14, Article 9, Section 5, relating to the transfer of pooled tax increment to the city’s affordable housing trust fund Whereas, Laws 2021, 1st Special Session, Chapter 14, Article 9, Section 5 (the “Special Law”), and specifically Subdivision 1(c) of the Special Law, authorizes the City of St. Louis Park (the “City”) or the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) to transfer tax increment accumulated for housing development purposes under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1763, Subdivision 2, paragraph (b) or (d), to the housing trust fund established by the City under Minnesota Statutes, section 462C.16, for the purposes set forth in the Special Law ; and Whereas, under the Special Law, the authority to make such transfers shall expire on December 31, 2026; and Whereas, the authority granted under Subdivision 1(c) of the Special Law is effective upon approval by a majority vote of the City Council, and filing a certificate with the Minnesota Secretary of State, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 645.021, subd. 2 and 3; and Whereas, the City Council has determined that is in the best interest of the City and its residents to approve the Special Law; Now, therefore, be it resolved that: 1.The Special Law is hereby approved in all respects. 2.The city clerk is authorized and directed to file with the Secretary of State a certified copy of this resolution and the appropriate certificate in the form prescribed by the State Attorney General. 3.City staff are authorized and directed to take all actions necessary to implement the Special Law and bring before this Council further proceedings as necessary to implement the Special Law. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL OF SPECIAL LAW BY GOVERNING BODY (Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, 645.02 and 645.021) STATE OF MINNESOTA County of Hennepin TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE OF MINNESOTA: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, That the undersigned chief clerical off icer of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”) DOES HEREBY CERTIFY, that in compliance with the provisions of Laws 2021, 1st Special Session, Chapter 14, Article 9, Section 5, requiring approval by a majority of all of the members of the governing body of said local governmental unit before it becomes effective, the City Council of the City at a meeting duly held on the 20th day of September, 2021, by resolution did approve said Laws 2021, 1st Special Session, Chapter 14, Article 9, Section 5 by a majority vote of all of the members thereof (Ayes_____; Noes _______; Absent or not voting ________); and the following additional steps, if any required by statute or charter were taken: _none__. A copy of the resolution is hereto annexed and made a par t of this certificate by reference. Signed: City Clerk (This form prescribed by the Attorney General and furnished by the Secretary of State as required in Minnesota Statutes 645.021.) Please see reverse side for instructions fo r completing this form. Page 4 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4e ) Title: Resolution relating to transfer of pooled tax increment to city’s affordable housing trust fund INSTRUCTIONS •Include the chapter number in the Laws of Minnesota that is to be approved on the Certificate of Approval form and in the resolution that approves the special law. •Return the completed originally signed Certificate of Approval form with a photo copy of the resolution that approved the special law to: Election Division Secretary of State 180 State Office Building 100 Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd St. Paul, MN 55155-1299 •If you have any questions, please contact Nancy Breems at 651/215-1440. Page 5 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4e ) Title: Resolution relating to transfer of pooled tax increment to city’s affordable housing trust fund Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4f Executive summary Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Recommended action: Motion to approve Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19, between the city and Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, for communication antennas and related equipment on the city’s water tower at 2541 Nevada Ave S. Policy consideration: None at this time. Summary: On Nov. 3, 1997 the city council approved an original lease agreement with Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless allowing the installation of equipment for cellular antenna purposes on the water tower at 2541 Nevada Ave nue South. Three amendments to the original agreement were approved on Jan. 7, 2013, Nov . 17, 2014 and Feb. 21, 2017 respectively to account for equipment replacement, modifications and rent adjustments. Financial or budget considerations: The annual lease rate for 2023 will be $69,642.78. There is no increase to the previous rent as there is a reduction in equipment. The rent structure is based on the number and type of antennas/auxiliary boxes and their height above ground. The financial terms of this agreement require annual lease payments with a 3% annual rate increase. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreeme nt 42-19 Memorandum for Lease Amendment No. 4 Prepared by: Mike Okey, public works services manager Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, public works superintendent Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager 1 MIN Cedar Knoll Park Amendment No. 4 to Water Tower Antenna Agreement 7023797v1 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO WATER TOWER ANTENNA AGREEMENT CONTRACT NO. 4219 This AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO WATER TOWER ANTENNA AGREEMENT (“Amendment) is made this ______ day of ________________________ , 2021, by and between the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (“City”) and Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless (hereinafter “LESSEE”), successor by merger with Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC, with its principal office located at One Verizon Way, Mail Stop 4AW100, Basking Ridge, New Jersey 07920, with reference to the facts set forth in the Recitals below: RECITALS A.City and LESSEE are parties to a Water Tower Antenna Agreement dated November 3, 1997, Amendment No. 1 dated January 7, 2013, Amendment No. 2 dated November 17, 2014, and Amendment No. 3 to Water Tower Antenna Agreement dated February 21, 2017 (collectively, the “Agreement”) whereby City has leased a portion of City’s real property (the “Property”) and water tower to LESSEE, along with access and utility rights. B.City and LESSEE desire to amend the Agreement to (i) provide for modified equipment to be added to the water tower and (ii) provide for extension terms. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the facts contained in the Recitals above, the mutual covenants and conditions below, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1.Effective immediately, the Agreement is hereby amended to allow a water tower installation as shown on Exhibit B-4, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2.The term of the Agreement is hereby extended for one (1) additional five (5) year extension term commencing on January 1, 2023 (the “Extension Term”). As indicated on Exhibit F, the annual rent for 2023 shall be $69,642.78. Commencing on January 1, 2024, and each January 1 thereafter, the annual rent shall increase by three percent (3%) as calculated on Exhibit F. Upon expiration of the Extension Term, the Agreement shall automatically be extended on the same terms and conditions for three (3) additional five (5) year terms unless LESSEE terminates it at the end of the then current term by giving City written notice of the intent to terminate at least six (6) months prior to the end of the then current term. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Page 2 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Page 3 3 MIN Cedar Knoll Park Amendment No. 4 to Water Tower Antenna Agreement 7023797v1 Exhibit B-4 See the attached plans. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Page 4 SHEET CONTENTS:LESSOR APPROVALNORTHCONTACTSISSUE SUMMARYSHEET INDEXDEPARTMENTAL APPROVALSVICINITY MAPGENERAL NOTESPROJECT INFORMATION9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344SELECTIVE SITE CONSULTANTS9900 WEST 109TH ST, SUITE 300OVERLAND PARK, KS 66210(913) 438-7700NO CHANGES.CHANGES NEEDED. SEE COMMENTS ON PLANS.LESSOR / LICENSOR: PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE BOX BELOWVICINITY MAP177.6' AGL (APPROX.)09-03-20PROJECT INFORMATIONSITE NAME:SITE ADDRESS:COUNTY:GROUND ELEVATION:BASED ON RFDS DATED:PROJECT NUMBER:OVERALL STRUCTURE HEIGHT:ANTENNA TIP HEIGHT:ANTENNA CENTERLINE HEIGHT:ARCHITECT:LESSEE:CONTACTSVERIZON WIRELESS10801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438CONSTRUCTION DEPT (952) 946-4700DESIGN 1 ARCHITECTS LLC.9973 VALLEY VIEW ROADEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344(952) 903-9299MIN CEDAR KNOLL PARKSITE LOCATIONMIN CEDAR KNOLL PARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416902.5' AMSLLONGITUDE: LATITUDE:GENERATOR ON SITE:SITE PHOTOTOWER BUILT:UNKNOWNSTRUCTURE HEIGHT:177.6' AGL20202183469HENNEPINWN ° ' "° ' "44 5730.1093 22 19.30120' AGLVARIES, SEE A-4T-1PROJECT DESCRIPTION:REMOVE:·(9) ANTENNAS·(3) RRUS (ON TOWER)·(6) RRUS (IN SHELTER)·(3) HYBRID JUMPERS·(6) DIPLEXERS (IN SHELTER)PROPOSED:·(9) ANTENNAS·(3) RRUS·(3) HYBRID JUMPERS·POWERSHIFT EQUIPMENTCOAX RUNS:LESSOR:"X" COAX RUN = (2) 1-5/8" LINES @ 225' (EXISTING)"Y" COAX RUN = (2) 1-5/8" LINES @ 300' (EXISTING)"Z" COAX RUN = (2) 1-5/8" LINES @ 260' (EXISTING)MISC. COAX = (3) 6RRU HYBRID CABLE (EXISTING)SHEET INDEXSHEET SHEET DESCRIPTIONT-1PROJECT INFORMATION, MAPS, DIRECTIONS, AND SHEET INDEXA-1.1 OVERALL SITE PLANA-1.2OVERALL TOWER ELEVATION, & ENLARGED PLANSA-2EQUIPMENT ROOM PLAN AND ONE-LINE DIAGRAMA-3EXISTING KEYSA-4 PROPOSED KEYSA-5DETAILSA-6SECTOR AND SHROUD DETAILSA-7GENERAL NOTES & SPECIFICATIONSA-8PHOTOSISSUE SUMMARYREV DESCRIPTIONSHEET OR DETAILA ISSUED FOR REVIEWALLB ISSUED FOR LESSOR APPROVALALL0 ISSUED FOR LESSOR APPROVALALLVZW DEPARTMENTAL APPROVALSJOB TITLENAMEDATERF ENGINEERCRISTOFER RAMIREZ01-19-21CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERBRENT FORBES01-20-21LESSOR / LICENSOR APPROVALSIGNATUREPRINTED NAMEDATECITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKMIKE OKEYPUBLIC WORKS SERVICE MANAGER7305 OXFORD ST.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55413(952) 924-2181MOKEY@STLOUISPARK.ORGYES (VZW/DIESEL)STRUCTURALENGINEER:NOTE:LESSOR CONTACT INFORMATION, GROUND ELEVATION, BASELINE FOR ANTENNAHEIGHTS & STRUCTURE HEIGHTS PER "MINC CEDAR KNOLL PARK PCS - LTE,"REVISION 2 SUBMITTAL DATED 01-18-17 BY DESIGN 1 OF EDEN PRAIRIE.BADGER STATE INSPECTION (BSI)KELLY MULHERN(715) 533-8686KMULHERN@BADGERSTATEINSPECTION.COMCITY THIRD PARTYINSPECTION:Date:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 5 9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344SHEET CONTENTS:SCALE:1OVERALL SITE PLAN1" = 20'-0"OVERALL SITE PLANA-1.1NORTHDate:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 6 9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344SHEET CONTENTS:SCALE:1OVERALL TOWER ELEVATION1" = 20'-0"OVERALL ELEVATIONEXISTING / PROPOSED PLANSA-1.2SCALE:3ENLARGED PLAN3/16" = 1'-0"SCALE:2ENLARGED PLAN3/16" = 1'-0"NORTHDate:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 7 9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344SHEET CONTENTS:SCALE:1EQUIPMENT ROOM PLAN3/16" = 1'-0"NORTHEQUIPMENT ROOM PLANONE-LINE DIAGRAMA-21234FIBER RACKLTE / AWS CABINETRAYCAPCPRI PANELEQUIPMENT IN SHELTER KEY:567DIPLEXERSFILTER RACKCDMA 800910BATTERIESATS PANEL8POWER SYSTEM109652143382ONE-LINE DIAGRAM77Date:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 8 SHEET CONTENTS:9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 553441EXISTING KEYSEXISTING KEYA-3Date:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 9 SHEET CONTENTS:9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 553441PROPOSED KEYSPROPOSED KEYA-4Date:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 10 SHEET CONTENTS:9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344DETAILSA-5SCALE:1DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:2DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:3DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:4DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:5DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:6DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"7DETAILSCALE:8DETAILN.T.S8A-5Date:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 11 SHEET CONTENTS:9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344SECTOR & SHROUD DETAILSA-6SCALE:3DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:4DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:5DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:6DETAIL3/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:7DETAIL1-1/2" = 1'-0"SCALE:2SECTOR DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"SCALE:1SECTOR DETAIL1/4" = 1'-0"············Date:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 12 SHEET CONTENTS:9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344GENERAL NOTESSPECIFICATIONSA-7General Notes:1. In the event that Special Inspections are not performed in compliance with the contract terms, bid specifications and/or specified form, the GeneralContractor will be liable for all damages, construction performance, failures, and corrective actions related to the same.2. The following general notes shall apply to drawings and govern unless otherwise noted or specified.3. The work delineated in these drawings and described in the specifications shall conform to codes, standards and regulations that have jurisdiction in thestate of MN, and the city of ST. LOUIS PARK.4. Requirements and regulations pertaining to R.F. safety codes and practices must be incorporated in the work even though they may not be listedindividually and separately in either the drawings or the specifications.5. Compare field conditions with architectural and engineering drawings. Any discrepancies shall be directed to the Architect for clarification prior to fabricationand/or construction. Submit necessary shop drawings prior to fabrication for approval by the Architect. No information or details on these sheets may beused without the permission of the owner, or the architect.6. Do not scale drawings!7. Unless otherwise shown or noted, typical details shall be used where applicable.8. Details shall be considered typical at similar conditions.9. Safety measures: The contractor shall be solely and completely responsible for the conditions of the job site, including safety of the persons and propertyand for independent engineering reviews of these conditions. The Architect's or Engineers' job site review is not intended to include review of the adequacyof the contractor's safety measures.10. Within these plans and specifications, "Owner" implies VERIZON WIRELESS.11. The work is the responsibility of the general contractor unless noted otherwise.12. The terms "contractor" and "g.c." refer to the owner's general contractor and the general contractor's sub-contractors. It is the general contractor'sresponsibility to determine the division of work among sub-contractors.13. The general contractor is responsible in obtaining necessary public and private underground utility locate services prior to start of excavating / construction.– – ’’WRAPPING SPECIFICATIONS:1) WRAPPING - SCOPE OF WORK INCLUDES PROVIDING COORDINATION OF THE MATERIALS AND LABORFOR WRAPPING THE POSITION #1 ("VZE01") ANTENNAS WITH CONCEALMENT FILM. CONTRACTORSHALL UTILIZE FINISH COAT COLOR "01 BR Warm Sun", OR EQUIVALENT TO MATCH EXISTING TANKCOLOR (VERIFY FINISH COAT COLOR WITH LESSOR).●●GENERAL NOTES PER 3RD PARTIES REQUEST:1. TO PREVENT DAMAGE TO THE LANDSCAPING AROUND THE TOWER, CONTRACTORS USING LIFTS ORHEAVY EQUIPMENT TO WORK AROUND THE TOWER MUST INSTALL 3/4" THICK PLYWOOD UNDER THETIRES OF THE EQUIPMENT2. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL SET UP A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING WITH THE CITY ANDCITY 3RD PARTY INSPECTION FORM A MINIMUM OF 48 HOURS PRIOR TO THE START OF THEPROJECT. WORK SHALL NOT BEGIN WITHOUT A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING.3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL WARRANTY THE WORKMANSHIP ON THE SITE FOR A PERIOD OF 1 YEARFROM THE DATE OF THE PROJECT ACCEPTANCE BY THE OWNER. THIS WILL INCLUDE ALLWORKMANSHIP, WELDING, AND PAINTING (INCLUDING COLOR MATCH).4. THE VERIZON INSTALLATION SHOULD FOLLOW ALL OSHA REGULATIONS. ALL VIOLATIONS NOTED BYTHE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK BECAUSE OF THIS INSTALLATION, SHALL PROMPTLY BE REPAIRED BYVERIZON.5. FINAL SITE CLEANUP MUST BE APPROVED BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. CONTRACTORSHALL CLEAN THE AREAS PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION.6. CONTRACTOR IS TO PROVIDE A LABEL ON THE DOOR OF VERIZON EQUIPMENT CABINETS TOCLEARLY IDENTIFY VERIZON CONTACT INFORMATION. LABELS SHOULD ALSO BE ADDED ON ALLVERIZON EQUIPMENT NEAR THE ANTENNAS (FC12, DC2, CABLES, PORTS, PIPES AND TMA's). LABELSSHOULD ALSO BE ATTACHED TO THE COAX CABLES AND DC POWER AND HYBRID LINES AT THENBOTTOM OF THE TOWER AND ON THE STIFFENER. THIS WILL HELP THE CITY IDENTIFY VERIZONEQUIPMENT AND CONTACT INFORMATION IF THERE BECOMES AND ISSUE WITH THE EQUIPMENT.INFORMATION ON THE LABEL SHOULD INCLUDE BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: VERIZON7. AT THE COMPLETION OF THE INSTALLATION, VERIZON SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING THECITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK WITH A CLEAN SET OF FINAL "AS-BUILTS" DRAWINGS. THE DRAWINGSSHOULD INCLUDE THE CHANGES DURING THE INSTALLATION AS REFLECTED ON THECONTRACTORS "AS-BUILT REDLINES". IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO DOCUMENTAND REPORT ANY CHANGES MADE DURING CONSTRUCTION, SO THE CHANGES, MADE DURINGCONSTRUCTION ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN ON THE FINAL DRAWINGS.Date:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 13 SHEET CONTENTS:9973 VALLEY VIEW RD.(952) 903-929910801 BUSH LAKE ROADBLOOMINGTON, MN 55438(952) 946-4700PROJECT DRAWN BY:DATE:CHECKED BY:LOC. CODE # 25656520202183469MINCEDAR KNOLLPARKL-SUB62541 NEVADA AVE. S.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416JMKB01-05-21MJSREV. A01-14-21REV. B01-21-21REV. 008-23-21WWW.DESIGN1EP.COMDESIGNEDEN PRAIRIE, MN 55344SCALE:1PHOTON.T.S PHOTOSA-8SCALE:2PHOTON.T.SSCALE:3PHOTON.T.SSCALE:4PHOTON.T.SSCALE:5PHOTON.T.SSCALE:6PHOTON.T.SDate:I hereby certify that this plan,specification or report wasprepared by me or under my directsupervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Architect underthe laws of the state of MINNESOTA.ROBERT J. DAVIS, Reg. No. 12427Signed:08/24/2021City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S.Page 14 4 MIN Cedar Knoll Park Amendment No. 4 to Water Tower Antenna Agreement 7023797v1 Exhibit F Verizon Lease Rent Schedule at EWT 4 located at 2541 Nevada Ave S Verizon Site No. MIN060 / City No. 4219-16 Maximum No. of Antennas (12) Maximum No. of Auxiliary Boxes (12) Height (Above Ground)120’ Annual Rent Year $69,642.78 2023 $71,732.06 2024 $73,884.02 2025 $76,100.55 2026 $78,383.56 2027 $80,735.07 2028 $83,157.12 2029 $85,651.84 2030 $88,221.39 2031 $90,868.03 2032 $93,594.07 2033 $96,401.89 2034 $99,293.95 2035 $102,272.77 2036 $105,340.95 2037 $108,501.18 2038 $111,756.22 2039 $115,108.90 2040 $118,562.17 2041 $122,119.04 2042 1.Rent shall increase by 3% for each year of the Agreement, beginning on January 1, 2024. 2.Annual rent payment is due prior to January 1 of each year (i.e., 2023 rent is due by 12/31/22). 3.In the future, should the number of antennas or auxiliary boxes increase, the rent will be adjusted. The rent amount shall never decrease. 4.The lease provides for a 5-year team ending 12/31/2027 and 3 additional 5 -year terms (ending 12/31/2042). City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Page 15 MIN Cedar Knoll Park Memorandum of Amendment No. 4 to Water Tower Antenna Agreement Contract No. 4219 7074704v1 1 DRAFTED BY AND RETURN TO: Moss & Barnett (AAD) 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (Site Name: MIN Cedar Knoll Park) (Prepared by Cheryl S. Sheldon, Telephone No. (612) 877-5392) Legal Description on Page 4 ______________________________________________________________________________ (Space above this line for Recorder's use.) MEMORANDUM OF AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO WATER TOWER ANTENNA AGREEMENT CONTRACT NO. 4219 THIS MEMORANDUM OF AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO WATER TOWER ANTENNA AGREEMENT CONTRACT NO. 4219 (“Memorandum”) dated ________________, 20___, was entered into by and between City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation, with a notice address of c/o City Manager, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 (“City”), and Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, with its address for notice located at 180 Washington Valley Road, Bedminster, New Jersey 07921 (“LESSEE”), successor by merger with Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLC. This Memorandum evidences that CITY and LESSEE, or their predecessors in interest, originally entered into a Water Tower Antenna Agreement dated November 3, 1997, Amendment No. 1 dated January 7, 2013, a memorandum of which was recorded March 12, 2013, as Document No. A09928423, Amendment No. 2 dated November 17, 2014, Amendment No. 3 to Water Tower Antenna Agreement dated February 21, 2017, and a Fourth Amendment to Water Tower Antenna Agreement dated _________________, 20__ (collectively, the “Agreement”) whereby City has leased a portion of City’s real property described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and water tower to LESSEE, along with access and utility rights. The amended Agreement provides for modified equipment to be added to the water tower and provides that the term of the Agreement is extended for one (1) additional five (5) year City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Page 16 extension term commencing on January 1, 2023 (the Extension Term"). Upon expiration of!: Extension Term, the term of the Agreement shall automatically be extended on the S,, and conditions for three (3) additional five (5) year terms unless LESSEE terminates it at/° ' of the then current term by giving City written notice of the intent to terminate at least SIX months prior to the end of the then current term. IN WITNES S WHEREOF, CITY and LESSEE have duly executed this Memorandum @6 of the day and year written below. CITY : City of St Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation By: ------------- Name: Its: Mayor By: ·------------ Name: Its: City Manager Date: ---''------------- LESSEE: Cellco Partnership d/b/4 · eless Date: 9-/-2l sAooossssosossossA Acknowledgm ents on following page Remainder of page intentionally left blank MIN Cedar Kno ll Park Memorandum of Amend Antenna Agreeme»,, '®©nt No. 4 to Water Tower 70747049j !Contract No. 4219 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Page 177 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Page 189 MIN Cedar Knoll Park Memorandum of Amendment No. 4 to Water Tower Antenna Agreement Contract No. 4219 7074704v1 4 Exhibit “A” (Legal Description) All of lots A, 17, 21 and that part of lot 18 described as beginning at a point in the North line of said Lot 18 distant 210.00 feet East of the Northwest corner thereof; thence South 75.00 feet; thence West 31.00 feet; thence South 65.00 feet; thence East 31.00 feet; thence South 90.00 feet; thence West 210.00 feet to a point in the West line of said Lot 18 distant 230.00 feet south from the Northwest corner thereof; thence South to the most Southerly corner of said Lot 18; thence Northeasterly to the Southeasterly corner thereof; thence North to the Northeast corner thereof; thence West to the point of beginning. All in “Home Addition to St. Louis Park”, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County recorder in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. Abstract and Torrens Property City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4f) Title: Lease Amendment No. 4 to City Agreement No. 42-19 - Cellco Partnership dba Verizon, 2541 Nevada Ave. S. Page 199 Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4g Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 741 – Removal of stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing removal of stop signs on 25th Street and Boone Avenue and rescinding Resolution 6079. Policy consideration: Installing and removing traffic controls is allowed per the city 's established regulatory authority. The request was considered with the city's traffic control policy in mind . Summary: Staff received a request to remove stop signs at the intersection of 25th Street and Boone Ave nue in August 2020. The city 's traffic control policy and the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD) guide the installation of stop or yield signs. The policy sets out warrant criteria that an intersection should meet to have signs installed. The stop sign criteria for traffic volumes, crash history, and sightlines at this intersection are not met. In addition, the existing stop signs are in an irregular pattern that average drivers would not expect. The traffic committee discussed this intersection at the August 2020 meeting and recommended the removal of both stop signs. Two letters were sent out to the surrounding area (130 total addresses), looking for comments and concerns regarding the proposed traffic control change. Nine total comments were received. The full comments are provided in the report. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of removing stop signs is negligible and will come out of the general operating budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Location map Resolution 6079 N ew resolution Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4g) Page 2 Title: Traffic Study 741 – Removal of stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue Discussion Background: Staff received a request to remove stop signs at the intersection of 25th Street and Boone Ave nue in August 2020. The city 's traffic control policy and the Minnesota Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD) guide the installation of traffic control signs. The policy sets out warrant criteria that an intersection should meet to have traffic controls installed. Stop signs are installe d to control conflicting traffic movements at intersections and assign who has the right of way. Multiple studies have found that stop signs don't slow down traffic except in the immediate vicinity of the intersection. Meaning, stop or yield signs are not an effective traffic calming measure to decrease overall vehicle speeds on a street segment. Stop compliance is low when drivers believe the signs are not justified. Places where people have a false sense of security (an assumption that vehicles will stop or yield) and vehicles don't stop or yield, can create a safety hazard. Due to these potential impacts, the city takes traffic control requests seriously and completes a thorough review of the intersection. Traffic committee : The traffic committee is an internal employee workgroup made up of the engineering, operations, police, and community development department staff . The group meets monthly to discuss traffic requests from across the city and makes recommendations on possible changes. Any official changes to traffic controls or parking restrictions are brought to the city council for approval. 25th St reet at Boone Ave nue is a T-intersection with approaches to the north, east, and south. There are existing stop signs at the east and south approaches. Stop or yield signs should be considered at the intersection of two minor streets or local roads where the intersection has three or more approaches and where one of the following conditions exists. In this case, no conditions were met. •Combined vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian volumes entering the intersection from all approaches averages more than 2,000 a day. Result: According to a GPS analysis, less than 2,000 people enter the intersection a day. •Crash records indicate five or more crashes within a three-year period. Result: Crash history showed no reported accidents within the last three years. •The ability to see conflicting traffic on an approach is not sufficient to allow a road user to stop or yield in compliance with the normal right of way rule if stopping or yielding. Result: The sightlines were observed to allow road users the ability to adequately apply the normal right of way rule when stopping or yielding from all approaches. In addition to the above, the existing stop signs are in an irregular pattern that average drivers would not expect. Instead of being symmetrical, the south approach has a stop sign while the north approach is uncontrolled. Irregular stop sign arrangements can cause confusion, and drivers new to an intersection are unable to reliably anticipate other driver's behavior. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4g) Page 3 Title: Traffic Study 741 – Removal of stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue At the August 2020 meeting, the traffic committee recommended removing all stop signs at 25th St reet and Boone Avenue because none of the conditions for a traffic control were met, and the current signage is confusing and non-standard. Resolution: The stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue are governed by Resolution 6079. The recommended action and attached resolution rescind this resolution. Community feedback: In October 2020, a letter was sent to the surrounding area (130 addresses) asking for comments and feedback on the recommended sign removal. Staff received eight comments from community members: •I frequently travel to and from my home on Decatur to Boone Ave where I enter/exit Cedar Lake Road. I can only recall encountering another car at that intersection one or two times over the past five years or so. I fully support removal of the stop sign on the south approach to Boone Avenue. – Peggy Riley , 2451 Decatur Ave •Please do NOT spend the time and money to remove the stop signs at Boone Ave and 25th street. In addition to my driveway being completely unprotected to these cross streets they provide much needed SAFETY for our neighborhood. It forces people to pause and SLOW DOWN. There are a lot of kids in the neighborhood and having someone pause for a second at this intersection ensures they will be driving through the neighborhood at a safe speed. The time and effort to remove something that provides safety not only for my family but for all the houses at this intersection would and could end up being a grave mistake. Especially when the roads turn icy. Please let me know what I can do to stop someone from coming into my neighborhood and removing these. When I bought the house in this spot several years ago I was SO happy to see that someone had been thoughtful enough to have the stop signs there. Please leave them there! – Valerie and Hoc Tia •We are not in favor of removing the signs. Drivers use 25th street from Cedar Lake Road as a short cut to Club Road and the sign slows them down. That's why thankfully there are no accidents! The signs are necessary to slow down thru traffic in this residential area. And lately there are more delivery trucks coming through. – Robert and Miriam Kleinbaum, 8621 25th St •We would support the proposed removal of that stop sign. It doesn't seem to be necessary at this point. Thank you for including residents in this decision-making process. – Cheryl Scheer and Louis Schenck, 8901 Club Rd •My husband, Jordan, and I are very supportive of removing the proposed stop signs. That intersection is confusing to only have a stop sign in one direction in the N-S lanes. I think this will provide better traffic control and clarity. – Lexi Nadeau, 2445 Decatur Ave •I have lived on this corner of 25th and Boone for almost 40 years. I honestly am not sure what a solution to better safety at this corner would be. For all of my forty years here, I have witnessed rampant non-compliance with STOP sign rules at both STOP City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4g) Page 4 Title: Traffic Study 741 – Removal of stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue signs. I personally have been completely stopping at both signs for 40 years. It is not that difficult. It is the law. I have questions for all three of the conditions you say are important, 1)Please consider when your GPS analysis was done. If during this current pandemic, remember that there are many fewer people driving these days than normally. 2)Your letter implies that there have been no accidents that could have been prevented by installing STOP or YIELD signs. Might I point out that there are already STOP signs at this intersection that perhaps have contributed to the lack of accidents? Your logic seems to be completely backwards. 3)It is true that the sight lines are, for the most part, adequate to go without the STOP signs, but have you considered that many vehicles come barreling down the alley straight onto Boone and are going quite fast knowing that they have no STOP sign until Cedar Lake Road? Due to recent additions of private fencing, a person stopped on 25th turning left onto Boone southbound can easily be shocked by a car right behind him which has come around the corner from Club or straight off of that alley, traveling quite fast. Such speeding vehicle may not be seen by a person stopped at the 25th Street STOP sign and then making the left turn at a reasonable speed. If you decide to check this out, please try it in an ordinary car. People who drive SUVs or trucks do not realize that not everyone has the height advantage they have, but are driving legal vehicles and have just as much right to safety. I can attest that the current STOP signs are only occasionally delivering a STOP response, but usually cause at least a slowdown. Removing the signs might lead all of my neighbors to think they NEVER have to stop. I worry. – Kay Thrall, 2501 Boone Ave •I have lived in the neighbourhood for just over a year and I drove through this intersection almost daily at -least twice if not more. In the past 12months not once have I even encountered another vehicle at the intersection while I was driving. There is absolutely no need for these stop signs. I 100% agree with removing them! – Amanda Robison, 2455 Decatur Ave •I have a few questions regarding the stop sign removal. 1. When was the traffic control test done? Was is during COVID? 2. Why were the signs originally put there 3. How long was your test? My only concern is I have 3 special needs kids that will run down the street. I feel the stop signs with have drivers stop and look. My kids don't always do that. I was almost in an accident at the intersection 25th and Boone. I was turning left onto Boone. The car had no stop sign and right -of -way and was going faster than they should have. If I were not forced to stop at the stop sign there could have been an accident . – Christine Johnson, 8516 25th St City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4g) Page 5 Title: Traffic Study 741 – Removal of stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue In August 2021, another letter was sent to the surrounding area (130 total addresses) asking for comments and feedback on the recommended sign removal. Staff received one comment from community members: •As residents of West 25th Street and Boone, we are opposed to removing the stop sign on West 25th Street. There is a lot of traffic from drivers who cut through from Cedar Lake Road to get to Club Road and the sign stops and slows them down. If the sign on Boone is removed then the one on West 25th would still be necessary in controlling the problem. Otherwise there will be a right of way situation. If the stop sign on West 25th has to be removed, please replace it with a yield sign at least which will slow the traffic and cars will be safer at that intersection. We are concerned that removal of both stop signs will create a traffic safety situation. – Miriam and Robert Kleinbaum, 8621 25th St TS 741 location map BOONE AVE S25TH ST W 2520 8804 8810 8616 2441 8701 8811 8805 8801 8814 8820 2511 8621 2504 2510 2514 8620 2524 2501 2505 2445 2451 0 50 10025 Feet Legend Existing stop signs Property lines City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4g) Title: Traffic Study 741 – Removal of stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue Page 6 Resolution No. 21-____ Removing stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park received a request to remove stop signs at the intersection of 25th Street and Boone Avenue; and, Whereas, the traffic committee has reviewed the request and recommended the removal of stop signs at the intersection of 25th Street and Boone Ave nue ; and, Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that Resolution 6079 is rescinded. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Page 7 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4g) Title: Traffic Study 741 – Removal of stop signs at 25th Street and Boone Avenue Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4h Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 744 – Removal of parking restrictions on Walker Street Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing removal of parking restrictions on Walker Street and rescinding Resolution 10-136. Policy consideration: Installing and removing traffic controls is allowed per the city 's established regulatory authority. The request was considered with the city's traffic control policy in mind. Summary: Staff received a request from the St. Louis Park School District to remove parking restrictions on Walker Street west of Wooddale Avenue in February 2020. The school district had requested the parking restriction removal for increased parking flexibility for the Central Community Center. At the May 2020 traffic committee meeting, the committee recommended removing parking restrictions along both sides of the north Hwy 7 frontage road. However, the recommendation was on the condition that the existing double yellow striping is removed. The recommendation was made because while the frontage road is wide enough to accommodate parking, vehicles on the road would need to cross the double yellow line to get around cars parked on the street. There is low traffic on the s treet that does not require a double yellow line. In late 2020, as a part of the construction in the Historic Walker Lake District, the double yellow striping south of the Central Community Center was removed. A letter was sent to the surrounding area (120 addresses in total) looking for comments and concerns regarding the proposed removal. Three total comments were received. The full comments are provided in the report. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of removing parking restrictions is negligible and will come out of the general operating budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committ ed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Location map Resolution 10-136 N ew resolution Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4h ) Page 2 Title: Traffic Study 744 – Removal of parking restrictions on Walker Street Discussion Background: Staff received a request from the St. Louis Park School District to remove parking restrictions on Walker Street west of Wooddale Avenue. This street segment is adjacent to the district's Central Community Center. Traffic committee : The traffic committee is an internal employee workgroup made up of the engineering, operations, police, and community development department staff . The group meets monthly to discuss traffic requests from across the city and makes recommendations on possible changes. Any official changes to traffic controls or parking restrictions are ultimately approved by the city council. Walker Street is 34 feet wide and currently has parking restricted on both sides of the street. In 2020, the street had double yellow striping. The school district had requested the parking restriction removal for increased parking flexibility for the Central Community Cente r. At the May 2020 traffic committee meeting, the committee recommended removing parking restrictions along both sides of the north Hwy 7 frontage road. However, the recommendation was on the condition that the existing double yellow striping is removed. The recommendation was made because while the frontage road is wide enough to accommodate parking, vehicles on the road would need to cross the double yellow line to get around cars parked on the street. There is low traffic on the street that does not require a double yellow line. In late 2020, as a part of construction in the Historic Walker Lake District, the double yellow striping south of the Central Community Center was removed. Resolution: The existing parking restrictions along Walker Street by the Central Community Center are under Resolution 10-136. The recommended action and attached resolution rescind this resolution to create the new parking areas. Community feedback: In August 2021, a letter was sent to the surrounding area (120 addresses) asking for comments and feedback on the recommended parking restriction removal. Staff received three comments from community members. •As the owner of the nearest commercial building to this parking, I would like to go on record as supporting the proposal to allow parking on both sides of Walker. The largest user of parking in the area is central community center. When there is an event there or an event at the athletic field, this parking will be use d extensively. In addition, this road is 40 feet wide along the proposed area. There should be room for a 7 foot wide car on each side and still have 25 feet for cars to pass. Once the light rail opens, it will be interesting to see how this area is used f or parking, but I see no need to limit it in any way at this point. – Curt Rahman •I honestly do not think it would be a good idea to allow parking along Walker St between Dakota Ave and Wooddale. I drive down that street morning and night Mon- Friday and I feel like if there were vehicles parked along both sides of the road it would be an extremely tight squeeze especially for the semi trucks or delivery vehicles that City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4h ) Page 3 Title: Traffic Study 744 – Removal of parking restrictions on Walker Street drop off liquor and food to the legion. There have been a handful of times where there has been a car parked along a side of the road and I've seen them almost get side swiped by other passing cars, or it's happened to myself where I will turn down Dakota from Wooddale and going around the first bend right by the school and a suv or mini van will be parked right outside the school entrance road (the one way road that's in front of the school) and I will have to swerve over because they aren't pulled off to the side of the road far enough. I think in theory it would be great having both sides ope n for parking, but when you take into consideration how people actually park their vehicles and drive the reality of it would not be that great. Sure if everyone drove properly and also parked correctly it would work, but after watching people park in front of the legion and also parallel park on the opposite side of the street, I don't think it would be beneficial. When winter comes it will make it even more difficult because I've noticed over the last couple years that the sidewalks and side streets aren't plowed very well and the side streets get more narrow in the winter. With the back entrance to the legion also being there I could see that being a problem for people having a more limited view of being able to see if another vehicle is approaching unless they were to pull out into the street to see which isn't good. There is parking behind the legion, in front of the legion, parallel parking along the other side on Walker St, the parking lot in front of the school, as well as parking along Library LN. I haven't seen a time where there has not been enough parking to the point we need parking available on Dakota St. – Alicia Narragon • We see no problem in doing that, it's a large wide open space and seems wasted quite frankly. Proceed! – Kathleen Perkins, 6212 35th St TS 744 location map HIGHW A Y 7 HIGHWA Y 7 SERVICE D R H I G H W A Y 7 35TH ST W DAKOTAAVE SDAKOTA AVE SWALKER ST BRUNS W I C K A V E S EB HWY 7 T O W O O D D A L E A V E WOOD D A L E A V E T O W B H W Y 7 6222 6212 3506 6363 6304 3540 6222 6228 6222 6312 3540 6216630063166320 6300 3524 6308 6525 0 100 20050 Feet Legend Proposed restriction removals Property lines City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4h) Title: Traffic Study 744 – Removal of parking restrictions on Walker Street Page 4 Resolution No. 21-____ Removal of parking restrictions on Walker Street (N Hwy 7 Frontage Road) Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park received a request to remove parking restrictions on Walker Street west of Wooddale Ave nue ; and, Whereas, the traffic committee has reviewed the request and recommended the removal of parking restrictions on the straight segment of Walker Street west of Wooddale Avenue; and, Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that Resolution 10-136 is rescinded . It is further resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota that the engineering director is authorized to: 1.Install parking restrictions on both sides of Walker Street (N Hwy 7 Frontage R oad) from the east right of way line of Wooddale Ave nue to the east property line of 6300 Walker St reet. 2.Install parking restrictions on both sides of Walker Street (N Hwy 7 Frontage R oad) from 100 feet east of the east property line of 3540 Colorado Avenue to 230 f eet east of the east property line of 3540 Colorado Avenue. 3.Install parking restrictions on the west side of Dakota Avenue from 50 feet east of the west right of way line of Dakota Avenue to 280 feet east of the west right of way line of Dakota Avenue. 4.Install parking restrictions on the east side of Dakota Avenue from the south right of way line of Walker St reet to 280 feet east of the west right of way line of Dakota Avenue. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Page 5 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4h ) Title: Traffic Study 744 – Removal of parking restrictions on Walker Street Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4i Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 745 –Authorize parking restrictions o n 41st Street Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing parking restrictions on 41st Street. Policy consideration: Installing and removing traffic controls is allow ed p er t he city’s established regulatory authority. The request was considered with the city’s traffic control policy in mind. Summary: Staff received an internal request to restrict parking on 41st Street near Natchez Avenue in March 2021. This location is adjacent to Water Treatment Plant #4 (WTP4). The operations department had requested the parking restriction to allow for safe large vehicle access to WTP4 in addition to eff ective snow clearing and grounds maintenance. At the August 2021 traffic committee meeting, the committee recommended restricting parking on the south side of 41st Street adjacent to WTP4. Safe access and maintenance to the water station is a part of the city’s essential services. A letter was sent to the surrounding area (70 addresses in total) looking for comments and concerns regarding the proposed parking restrictions. No comments were received by email, mail, or phone. Financial or budget considerations: The cost o f in stalling parking restrictions is estimated to b e $300 and is expected to come out of the general operating budget. Similar traffic s igns last roughly 10 y ears in the f i eld. 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 Location map Resolution Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4i) Page 2 Title: Traffic Study 745 –Authorize parking restrictions on 41st Street Discussion Summary: Staff received an internal request to restrict parking on 41st Street near Natchez Avenue in March 2021. This location is adjacent to Water Treatment Plant #4 (WTP4). The operations department had requested the parking restriction to allow for safe large vehicle access to WTP4 in addition to effective snow clearing and grounds maintenance. This request was reviewed at the August 2021 traffic committee meeting. Traffic committee: The traffic committee is an internal employee group made up of the engineering, operations, police, and community development department staff . The group meets monthly to discuss traffic requests from across the city and makes recommendations on possible changes. Any official changes to traffic controls or parking restrictions are ultimately approved by the city council. 41s t St reet is 34 feet wide and currently has permit parking restrictions along the north side near Natchez Avenue. The north side is permit parking only except from 8:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. and 3 – 4 p.m. Monday to Friday. This restriction is in place because to the west of this location is Susan Lindgren Elementary School and is during their major arrival and dismissal times. At the August 2021 traffic committee meeting, the committee recommended restricting parking on the south side of 41st Street adjacent to WTP4. Safe access and maintenance to the water station is a part of the city’s essential services. The pick-up and drop-off at Susan Lindgren should not be affected by the parking change. Parking is leaving a car unattended and off. Parents or caregivers waiting for students may wait in this area for school dismissal without breaking the parking restrictions. A letter was sent to the surrounding area (70 addresses in total) looking for comments and concerns regarding the proposed parking restrictions. No comments were received by email, mail, or phone. TS 745 location map NATCHEZ AVE S40TH L N W 41ST S T W 0 100 20050 Feet Legend Proposed parking restriction Property lines Susan Lindgren Elementary School Water Treatment Plant #4 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4i) Title: Traffic Study 745 –Authorize parking restrictions on 41st Street Page 3 Resolution No. 21-____ Authorizing parking restriction s on 41st Street Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park received a request to install parking restrictions on 41st St reet near Natchez Ave nue ; and, Whereas, the traffic committee has reviewed the request and recommended restricting parking on the south side of 41st Street near Natchez Ave; and, Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the engineering director is authorized to: 1.Install parking restrictions on the south side of 41st St reet from the west right of way line of Natchez Ave nue to 180 feet west of the west right of way line of Natchez Avenue. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Page 4 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4i) Title: Traffic Study 745 –Authorize parking restrictions on 41st Street Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4j Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 746 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road. Policy consideration: Installing truck parking restrictions is allowed per city ordinance 2623-21. The request was considered with the city's traffic control policy in mind . Summary: In August 2021, the city council adopted an ordinance giving the city authority to restrict truck parking in non-residential areas. The ordinance focuses on semi-trailers, truck tractors, or other vehicles that are heavier than 12,000 pounds. The ordinance also includes vehicles whose main function is to tow other vehicles. Staff originally received concerns about truck parking restrictions along the N County Rd 25 Frontage Road in 2020. During the ordinance adoption process, staff received additional requests to restrict truck parking along the north frontage road. The request was then reviewed by the city's traffic committee. At the August 2021 meeting, the traffic committee recommended restricting truck parking on the north frontage road from Ottawa Ave nue to Minnetonka Boulevard . In August 2021, a letter was sent to the surrounding area (1109 addresses) asking for comments and feedback on the recommended truck parking restrictions. Staff received six comments and three phone calls from community members. The full details of the comments are in the report. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of installing these restrictions is estimated to cost $1,200 and is expected to come from the general operating budget. Similar traffic signs last roughly 10 years in the field. 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 Location map Resolution Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4j) Page 2 Title: Traffic Study 746 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road Discussion Background: Staff originally received concerns about truck parking restrictions along the N County Rd 25 Frontage Road in 2020. Under the current city zoning code, no motor vehicle, recreational vehicle, commercial vehicle, or trailer shall be permitted to stand or park in any residential district (R-1, R -2, R -3, R-4, and R- C) that exceed any of the following (Sec. 36-162.f.1): •Height of 8 feet •Length of 22 feet •Empty weight of 6,500 pounds In August 2021, the city council adopted an ordinance giving the city authority to restrict truck parking in non-residential areas. The ordinance focuses on semi-trailers, truck tractors, or other vehicles that are heavier than 12,000 pounds. The ordinance also includes vehicles whose main function is to tow other vehicles. During the ordinance adoption process, staff received additional requests to restrict truck parking along the north frontage road. The request was reviewed by the city's traffic committee. Traffic committee: The committee is an internal employee workgroup made up of the engineering, operations, police, and community development department staff . The group meets monthly to discuss traffic requests from across the city and makes recommendations on possible changes. Any official changes to traffic controls or parking restrictions are ultimately approved by the city council. At the August 2021 meeting, the traffic committee recommended restricting truck parking on the north frontage road from Ottawa Ave nue to Minnetonka Boulevard . Adjacent residential zoning is along the frontage road from Ottawa Avenue to Joppa Avenue. The remaining zoning is commercial. Due to the surrounding uses, including residential, the parking concerns exist at all hours of the day. The truck parking interferes with the ability for the surrounding commercial uses to operate due to a reduction of available daily parking for their daily operations. The adjacent businesses on this corridor have communicated to the city that the parked trucks are not related to their operations. Truck parking blocks sightline visibility for vehicles at intersections. This is heightened by the skew of the north frontage road to the north-south streets creating sharp and difficult angles to see around. Community feedback: In August 2021, a letter was sent to the surrounding area (1109 addresses) asking for comments and feedback on the recommended truck parking restrictions. Staff received six comments from community members. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4j) Page 3 Title: Traffic Study 746 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road • While truck parking on the north side of 25 is a more recent phenomena, there is an urgency to doing something now and not waiting till September. In just two days people who park on Lynn Avenue are going to be displaced, along with some days those that park in the lots and have garages will also not be able to park where they usually do. I agree semitrucks should not be parking on residential streets and a permanent ban should happen. That said you are going to have a lot of frustrated people and perhaps some struggling handicapped people if the trucks aren't given a reason to move during road construction. I've been annoyed by the trucks blocking visibility at the end of Lynn for the last few weeks and should have put together how inconvenient that is going to be during road construction on Lynn, but I guess it isn't my job to be thinking about these things. - Larry Miller, 3016 Lynn Ave #1C • I live at 3030 Lynn and agree that trucks are obscuring sight lines, causing unsafe conditions for vehicles, pedestrians, etc. I do support the proposal, however, wonder if the proposed vehicle weight should be lower than 12,000 pounds. Additionally, I've seen other jurisdictions place restrictions on number of axels on a vehicle. I don't know what would be best, however, I do support restrictions on truck parking. - Andrew Day - Horner, 3030 Lynn • I live on Sunset Blvd (corner Inglewood) and am very concerned about the parking of tractor-trailers on the Hwy 25 frontage roads. I regularly drive on the Hwy 25 frontage road behind the Starbucks (located at Minnetonka and Inglewood). This past spring, tractor-trailers were again parking there like they have in the past. There is not enough room for cars traveling in both directions when one or more semis are parked there. This is a dangerous situation. That section of frontage road is way too narrow for trucks to park there. And the pavement there is in bad shape as well, no doubt related to the trucks on that section of road. The situation gets even worse in the winter. I support banning parking for semis on the Hwy 25 frontage roads as proposed, but especially on the north side of Hwy 25 and east of Ottawa which is primarily residential. - Max Donath, 4200 Sunset Blvd • I think this is a great idea. Those trucks take up parking spaces from the residents and make it difficult to navigate the frontage roads because they are so huge. Some drivers also run their engines all night which creates noise and fills the air with noxious fumes. And then there's the trucks who need repairs and we are "treated" to the sound of a mechanic working on a broken down truck. On the other hand, will the drivers be given an alternate location where they can pull over for a few hours of rest? Will an accommodation be made for moving vans and large delivery trucks? City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4j) Page 4 Title: Traffic Study 746 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road Other than those two concerns, I whole heartedly support this new ordinance. – Barbara Lang, 4516 Hwy 7, Apt 21 •I support having truck parking restrictions on the north frontage road to county road 25. I would like to have no truck parking allowed. These trucks are too large and make it difficult to see when I am turning onto the frontage road. They also make the corner by Starbucks too narrow. The trucks make it difficult to meet oncoming traffic. And, they are unattractive to our neighborhood. - Carol Rue, 3045 Natchez Ave •We have been observing the increased parking of big trucks in our neighborhood with dismay. i am in favor of restricting the parking of large trucks on the Hwy 7/CR 25 frontage roads between France and Ottawa/Beltline Blvd. First of all, these trucks interfere with sight lines and they crowd the streets so that there is less room to drive. An especially difficult spo t is when they are parked right next to Starbucks. The curve going into or from the stoplight on Minnetonka and Inglewood has always been tricky, but now, it is actually frightening to approach that curve because of the interference of the trucks. Second ly, although this might seem petty, I think the trucks parked at all hours gives the neighborhood less of a residential appearance. I understand that much of the south side of the highway is zoned for business and light industry, but these vehicles are apparently not involved with those businesses. In other words, if these trucks were there to do business at those locations, I might see a reason for them to be parked there. We have pretty strict parking rules for neighborhoods, from my understanding. For example, one cannot park a commercial vehicle on the street in front of one 's house nor can one park certain sizes of RVs. I might be sympathetic if the owners/operators of these trucks lived where they are parked, but I'm pretty certain that this is not the case. I feel like the reason they are parking them in our neighborhood is because they cannot park them in their own neighborhoods. While I understand that it must be costly to park these trucks in commercial parking areas, it seems to me that it is part of their cost of doing business. I don't agree that the truck parking should be allowed starting at Lynn Ave. on the south side of the highway, unless those vehicles are affiliated with the business that they are parked in front of. – Julie Kay Anderson, 3045 Natchez Ave Along with the above comments, staff received three phone calls from community members with feedback. Summaries of those conversations are below: •I agree with the truck restrictions proposed for these corridors. - Greg Vardalos •I think that's a wonderful idea. I live on the north side of County Road 25. You can't see when you turn onto the frontage road. Please pass this ordinance, thank you. - Marko G •I agree with the truck restrictions on this corridor. With the trucks parking, the road gets so narrow that I have to walk on the "wrong" side of the road to continue on. You can't see drivers coming and it's dangerous. – Carolyn Irrgang LYNN AVE SINGLEWOOD AVE SJOPPA AVE SFRANCE AVE SBELTLINE BLVD31ST ST W INGLEWOODAVE SMONTEREY AVE SMIN N E T O N K A B L V D NATCHEZ AVE SPRINCETONAVE SMONTEREY CTJOPPA AVE SOTTAWA AVE SHUNTINGTONAVE SGLENHURST AVE SNATCHEZAVE SPRIVATE RDMINNETONKA BLVD COUNT Y R O A D 2 5 31ST ST W SERVI C E D R HI G H W A Y 7 COUN T Y R O A D 2 5 SERVICE D R H I G H W A Y 7 GLENHURST AVE SLYNN AVE STS 746 and TS 747 location map 0 0.250.13 Miles Legend Proposed truck parking restriction (both sides) Property lines City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4j) Title: Traffic Study 746 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road Page 5 Resolution No. 21-____ Authorizing truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park received a request to install truck parking restrictions on the N County Rd 25 Frontage Road between Ottawa Ave nue and Minnetonka Boulevard; and, Whereas, installing truck parking restrictions is allowed per city ordinance 2623-21; and, Whereas, the traffic committee has reviewed the request and recommended the installation of truck parking restrictions on the N County Rd 25 Frontage Road between Ottawa Avenue and Minnetonka Boulevard; and, Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota that the engineering director is authorized to: 1.Install truck parking restrictions on both sides of the N County Rd 25 Frontage Road from Ottawa Ave to Inglewood Avenue 2.Install truck parking restrictions on both sides of Inglewood Avenue from the N County Rd 25 Frontage Road to Minnetonka Boulevard . Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Page 6 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4j) Title: Traffic Study 746 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on N County Rd 25 Frontage Road Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4k Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 747 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on S County Rd 25 Frontage Road Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing truck parking restrictions on the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road from Monterey Avenue to France Ave nue. Policy consideration: Installing truck parking restrictions is allowed per city ordinance 2623-21. The request was considered with the city's traffic control policy in mind . Summary: In August 2021, the city council adopted an ordinance giving the city authority to restrict truck parking in non-residential areas. The ordinance focuses on semi-trailers, truck tractors, or other vehicles that are heavier than 12,000 pounds. The ordinance also includes vehicles whose main function is to tow other vehicles. S taff originally received a request to install truck parking restrictions along the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road in September 2019. The request to install truck parking restrictions along the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road was brought back to review by the traffic committee after the adoption of the ordinance. At the August 2021 meeting, the traffic committee recommended restricting truck parking on the south frontage road from Monterey Avenue to France Ave nue. In August 2021, a letter was sent to the surrounding area (1109 addresses) asking for comments and feedback on the recommended truck parking restrictions. Staff received seven comments and three phone calls from community members. The full details of the comments are in the report. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of installing these restrictions is estimated to cost $1,200 and is expected to come from the general operating budget. Similar traffic signs last roughly 10 years in the field. 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 Location map Resolution Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Deb Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4k) Page 2 Title: Traffic Study 747 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on S County Rd 25 Frontage Road Discussion Background: Staff originally received a request to install truck parking restrictions along the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road in September 2019. Under the current city zoning code, no motor vehicle, recreational vehicle, commercial vehicle, or trailer shall be permitted to stand or park in any residential district (R-1, R -2, R -3, R-4, and R- C) that exceed any of the following (Sec. 36-162.f.1): •Height of 8 feet •Length of 22 feet •Empty weight of 6,500 pounds In August 2021, the city council adopted an ordinance giving the city authority to restrict truck parking in non-residential areas. The ordinance focuses on semi-trailers, truck tractors, or other vehicles that are heavier than 12,000 pounds. The ordinance also includes vehicles whose main function is to tow other vehicles. The request to install truck parking restrictions along the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road was brought back to review by the traffic committee after the adoption of the ordinance. Traffic committee: The committee is an internal employee workgroup made up of the engineering, operations, police, and community development departments. The group meets monthly to discuss traffic requests from across the city and makes recommendations on possible changes. Any official changes to traffic controls or parking restrictions are ultimately approved by the city council. Truck parking along the south frontage road was brought up in community concerns since 2019. At that time, the traffic committee recommended restricting parking on the north side of the frontage road and at the intersections to increase sightlines and large vehicle maneuverability (trucks and Metro Transit buses). Truck parking restrictions were not recommended at that time because there was not a proper and efficient way to restrict them. At the August 2021 meeting, the traffic committee recommended restricting truck parking on the south frontage road from Monterey Avenue to France Ave nue. Adjacent residential zoning is along the frontage road from Inglewood Ave nue to France Avenue. An additional residential building is on the southeast corner of the frontage road and Lynn Avenue. The remaining adjacent zoning is industrial and business park. Due to the surrounding uses, including residential, the parking concerns exist at all hours of the day. The truck parking interferes with the ability for the surrounding uses to operate due to a reduction of available parking for their daily operations. The adjacent businesses on this corridor have communicated to the city that the parked trucks are not related to their operations. Truck parking blocks sightline visibility for vehicles at intersections. This is heightened by the skew of the south frontage road to the north-south streets creating sharp and difficult angles to see around. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4k) Page 3 Title: Traffic Study 747 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on S County Rd 25 Frontage Road Metro Transit's Route 17 runs along the south frontage road connecting downtown Minneapolis with 36th Street and Wooddale Ave nue . As noted previously, parking was restricted in 2019 in part due to parked trucks blocking safe passage by transit buses. There is also no pedestrian infrastructure (sidewalk or trail) along the road, meaning pedestrians and bicyclists must use the street to travel. The south frontage road from Beltline Boulevard to Lynn Avenue will be removed as a part of the ongoing Southwest Light Rail Transit project in the next two years. As a part of this con struction, a trail connection will be made from Beltline Boulevard to Lynn Avenue. Community feedback: In August 2021, a letter was sent to the surrounding area (1109 addresses) asking for comments and feedback on the recommended truck parking restrictions. Staff received seven comments from community members. Note, there was an error in the letter that went to residents that mistakenly showed restrictions from Lynn Avenue to France Avenue instead of Monterey Ave nue and France Ave nue . This was communicated to people who provided feedback about Monterey Ave nue : • I live at Parkway 25 Apartments and I am 100% supportive of the ordinance adopted by the city council August 2 restricting truck parking on County Road 25. Thank you, this will remove these eyesores from the neighborhood and free up parking for residents! - Larry Brants, 4015 County Rd 25, Apt 305 • We support the new ordinance. The parked rigs make our service road treacherous. - George and Julie Beck, 4015 County Rd 25 • I am very much in favor of these restrictions. In fact, I would prefer that you extend them a little farther on the south frontage road, past the General Office Products building, and allow truck parking only where there are parking cutouts. As you mentioned, portions of the area are residential, and the trucks are in the way of residents, deny them parking spaces, and are unsightly. It's not great for the commercial buildings either. With trucks there, they lose their visibility to customers and clients. The sight obstructions at the intersections and driveways are indeed dangerous, especially when some drivers barely slow down as they come tearing off of Hwy 25 onto the frontage road (somewhat understandable, given they fear getting rear ended by the eager drivers on 25 if they slow down as much as much as one normally would). Also, partly due to the unfortunate loss of our beautiful trail, there are often people walking and biking on the frontage road. With trucks parked there, it's essentially a one - lane road, and walkers and bikers must either be in that lane or be uncomfortably close to the trucks. I've lived in this neighborhood for nearly twenty years. When I first moved here, there was no truck parking on the frontage roads at all, so I was surprised when a fe w years ago, suddenly they were crowded with trucks. This is one of those times when returning to the wisdom of the past would actually be forward progress! - Rosalie Miller, 3200 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4k) Page 4 Title: Traffic Study 747 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on S County Rd 25 Frontage Road Inglewood Ave, Apt 307 • Thank you! I am very happy about this as I live right down the street and have been annoyed by the trucks parking there. I feel that it's a safety hazard for people walking on the road as well as cars since signage views can be obstructed. - Elaina Michelle • This has been an ongoing issue in this area, especially on the south frontage road from Lynn Ave to France Ave. In addition to the trucks obscuring sightlines to intersections and driveways, it has also led to other vehicles in this area following suit with illegal parking. Numerous requests have been made over the past six months for parking enforcement to be sent to the three -block radius of 30 1/2 St, Ewing Ave S, 31st St, and Inglewood Ave S. The parking in this area has been an ongoing issue and continues to get worse on a daily basis. Examples from just this morning include vehicles parked in front of all three hydrants on 31st St, full and partial blocking of numerous crosswalks and driveways, parking in front of No Parking signs, and vehicles obscuring stop signs on Inglewood Ave S and G lenhurst Ave S. Calls and emails to 311 have done nothing to alleviate this issue. - Jennifer Miescke • I think that it is critical to restrict these trucks. I can't believe they have been allowed to park there all this time. It is so dangerous. The road is reduced to one lane, you can't see cars coming at you. It is complete insanity that has disaster written all over it. I've been close to an accident several times myself. Please restrict these trucks. - Lydia Cesmat, 3030 France Ave, Apt 330 • We have been observing the increased parking of big trucks in our neighborhood with dismay. i am in favor of restricting the parking of large trucks on the Hwy 7/CR 25 frontage roads between France and Ottawa/Beltline Blvd. First of all, these trucks interfere with sight lines and they crowd the streets so that there is less room to drive. An especially difficult spot is when they are parked right next to Starbucks. The curve going into or from the stoplight on Minnetonka and Inglewood has always been tricky, but now, it is actually frightening to approach that curve because of the interference of the trucks. Secondly, although this might seem petty, I think the trucks parked at all hours gives the neighborhood less of a residential appearance. I understand that much of the south side of the highway is zoned for business and light industry, but these vehicles are apparently not involved with those businesses. In other words, if these trucks were there to do business at those locations, I might see a reason for them to be parked there. We have pretty strict parking rules for neighborhoods, from my understanding. For example, one cannot park a commercial vehicle on the street in front of one 's house nor can one park certain sizes of RVs. I might be sympathetic if the owners/operators of these trucks lived where they are parked, but I'm pretty certain that this is not the case. I feel like the reason they are parking them in our neighborhood is because they cannot park them in their own neighborhoods. While I understand that it must be costly to park these trucks in commercial parking areas, it seems to me that it is part of their cost of doing business. I don't agree that the truck City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4k) Page 5 Title: Traffic Study 747 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on S County Rd 25 Frontage Road parking should be allowed starting at Lynn Ave. on the south side of the highway, unless those vehicles are affiliated with the business that they are parked in front of. – Julie Kay Anderson, 3045 Natchez Av e In addition to the above comments, staff received three phone calls from community members offering feedback. The summaries of those conversations are below: • I don't care where the semis are parked, it doesn't really bother me. The construction on Minnetonka Boulevard is what's bothering me. There 's a parked red car in front of Vision Bank that doesn't move. This car has been there for much longer than 48 hours. - Annette Walder • I agree with it full-heartedly. It is definitely well needed and well appreciated. - Sandra Smith • I agree with restricting truck parking. The area around General Office Products is particularly dangerous with sightlines due to truck parking. - Katherine Steward LYNN AVE SINGLEWOOD AVE SJOPPA AVE SFRANCE AVE SBELTLINE BLVD31ST ST W INGLEWOODAVE SMONTEREY AVE SMIN N E T O N K A B L V D NATCHEZ AVE SPRINCETONAVE SMONTEREY CTJOPPA AVE SOTTAWA AVE SHUNTINGTONAVE SGLENHURST AVE SNATCHEZAVE SPRIVATE RDMINNETONKA BLVD COUNT Y R O A D 2 5 31ST ST W SERVI C E D R HI G H W A Y 7 COUN T Y R O A D 2 5 SERVICE D R H I G H W A Y 7 GLENHURST AVE SLYNN AVE STS 746 and TS 747 location map 0 0.250.13 Miles Legend Proposed truck parking restriction (both sides) Property lines City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4k) Title: Traffic Study 747 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on S County Rd 25 Frontage Road Page 6 Resolution No. 21-____ Authorizing truck parking restrictions on S County Rd 25 Frontage Road Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park received a request to install truck parking restrictions on the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road west of France Ave nue; and, Whereas, installing truck parking restrictions is allowed per city ordinance 2623-21; and, Whereas, the traffic committee has reviewed the request and recommended the installation of truck parking restrictions on the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road between Monterey Avenue and France Ave nue ; and, Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota that the engineering director is authorize to: 1.Install parking restrictions on both sides of the S County Rd 25 Frontage Road from Monterey Avenue to France Ave nue . Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Page 7 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4k) Title: Traffic Study 747 –Authorize truck parking restrictions on S County Rd 25 Frontage Road Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4l Executive summary Title: Traffic Study 748 – Removal of p ermit parking restrictions at 2817 Brunswick Av enue Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution removing permit parking restrictions at 2817 Brunswick Avenue. Policy consideration: The in stallation and removal of parking restrictions are allowe d per the city’s e stablishe d regulatory authority. Summary: In August 2021, staff receive d a request by the owner of 2817 Brunswick Avenue to remove the permit parking adjacent to their property, stating that it is no longer ne ede d at this address. The parking was installed in 2014 under the city’s p ersons w ith disabilities permit parking ordinance (Sec. 30-160) through traffic study 643 (attached). Engineering staff reviewed this request and recommends the removal of the pe rmit parking. Financial or budget considerations: The cost to remove th ese controls is minimal and w ill come out of the general operating budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Resolution Resolution 14-019 – to be rescinded C ouncil report from Feb 3, 2014 (pgs 34 – 36) Location map Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4l) Page 2 Title: Traffic Study 748 – Removal of permit parking restrictions at 2817 Brunswick Avenue Resolution No. 21-____ Removal of permit parking restrictions at 2817 Brunswick Avenue Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park received confirmation that the permit parking restrictions at 2817 Brunswick Avenue were no longer needed; and, Whereas, the permit parking was installed under the city’s permit parking for persons with disabilities (Sec. 30-160) through traffic study 643; and, Whereas, engineering staff has reviewed this and recommended the removal of said permit parking at 2817 Brunswick Avenue; and, Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that Resolution 14-019 be rescinded. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk BRUNSWICK AVE S28TH ST W 2825 6121 2832 2801 2809 2812 2829 2804 2745 2757 2833 2741 2813 2744 2753 2800 2829 2816 2748 2830 2756 2805 2826 2753 2804 61192817 2808 2826 2749 2809 2821 2816 2752 2821 2817 2800 2756 2820 2748 2752 2745 2801 2749 2805 2820 2813 2833 2836 2744 2814 0 100 20050 Feet Legend Proposed restriction removal Property lines TS 748 location map City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4l) Title: Traffic Study 748 – Removal of permit parking restrictions at 2817 Brunswick Avenue Page 3 Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4m Executive summary Title: Final payment resolution - Sanitary Sewer Mainline Rehabilitation – Project No. 4021-3000 Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of $175,231.95 for the sanitary sewer mainline rehabilitation project with Hydro -Klean, LLC - city contract No. 14-21. Policy consideration: Not applicable . Summary: On Jan. 19, 2021, the city council awarded the bid for the sanitary sewer mainline rehabilitation project. The project was advertised, bid and awarded to Hydro-Klean, LLC in the amount of $399,685.60. The project consisted of lining 15,600 feet of sanitary sewer mains in various locations throughout the city. The lining process rehabilitates or renews sections of aging pipe , and it extends their service life another fifty plus years. The contractor completed the work within the contract time allowed according to approved plans and specifications. Additional work was added to the contract as part of change order 1 ($6,440.00). This was to address two areas of pipe that required reinforcement prior to lining. Although the change order increased the contract cost, the final contract cost of $387,018.30 is $19,107.30 (4.70%) less than the revised contract amount of $406,125.60. Financial or budget considerations: The final contract cost of the work performed by the contractor under contract No. 14-21 has been calculated as follows: Original contract price $ 399,685.60 Change order 1 +$ 6,440.00 Cost savings -$ 19,107.30 Final contract cost $ 406,125.60 Previous payments -$ 211,786.35 Balance due $ 175,231.95 This project was included in the city’s capital improvement plan (CIP). The work was paid for using the sanitary sewer fund. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, senior engineering project manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4m) Page 2 Title: Final payment resolution - Sanitary Sewer Mainline Rehabilitation – Project No. 4021-3000 Resolution No. 21-____ Resolution authorizing final payment and accepting work for the S anitary Sewer Mainline Rehabilitation project C ity Project No. 4021-3000 Contract No. 14-21 Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows: 1.Pursuant to a written contract with the city dated Jan. 19, 2021, Hydro-Klean, LLC, has satisfactorily completed the annual sanitary sewer mainline rehabilitation project, as per contract No. 14-21. 2.The Engineering Director has filed her recommendations for final acceptance of the work. 3.The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The final contract cost is $387,018.30 4.The City Manager is directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4n Executive summary Title: Joint powers agreement with Edina for speed limits on shared local streets Recommended action: Motion to authorize the mayor and city manager to execute the Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Edina for speed limits on shared local streets. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to have consistent speed limits on roads shared by the Cities of St. Louis Park and Edina? Summary: In May 2019, provisions passed by the Minnesota legislature gave cities increased authority to set speed limits. In June 2021, the city council adopted an ordinance clarifying the city’s intent to set speed limits on local roads. The implementation of new speed limits is expected to be completed by the end of Fall 2021. In August 2021, The City of Edina approved an implementation plan to change speed limits on their local roads. St. Louis Park and Edina share boundaries on 18 local roads in the Minikahda Vista (Morningside), Browndale (Country Club) and Brookside (Todd Park) neighborhoods. As a part of both cities’ evaluations, both agreed on setting the same speed limits for consistency. In the joint powers agreement (JPA), both cities agreed to set all shared local roads to 20 mph with two exceptions; 44th St and Wooddale Ave will be posted at 25 mph. The JPA does not cover Hennepin County, Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), or private roads. If either city changes course in the future with speed limit setting, the JPA can be revisited and agreed upon again by both cities. Financial or budget considerations: Financial impacts relating to changing speed limits citywide are currently estimated at $200,000. Costs include new signs, signal timing, and public outreach. The funding source is general obligation (GO) bonds. The costs for shared local streets are inclu ded in this estimate. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Resolution Joint powers agreement Council meeting report – June 21, 2021 (pgs 50 – 53) Prepared by: Ben Manibog, transportation engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4n ) Page 2 Title: Joint powers agreement with Edina for speed limits on shared local streets Resolution No. 21-____ Resolution approving joint powers agreement with the City of Edina to establish speed limits on shared local streets Whereas, Sec. 30-46 of the St. Louis Park City Code clarifies that the city engine er may establish speed limits for city streets under the city’s jurisdiction through Minnesota Statutes Section 169.14; and, Whereas, Sec. 26-7, Article I of the Edina City Code clarifies that the city engineer may establish speed limits for city streets under the city’s jurisdiction through Minnesota Statutes Section 169.14; and, Whereas, many local streets in the Minikahda Vista, Browndale, and Brookside neighborhoods are crossed by the municipal limit between the City of Edina and the City of St. Louis Park; and, Whereas, lower traffic speeds reduce both the likelihood and severity of crashes; and, Whereas, the current speed limits do not reflect the expectations of residents, drivers, and other road users. The current speed limit is higher than most drivers are comfortable traveling, and lowering it will support safety on those streets; and, Whereas, it is recommended that the City of Edina and the City of St. Louis Park enter into an agreement for speed limits on shared local streets to provide clear and consistent information to the traveling public; and, Whereas, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park deems it proper and in the public interest to enter into an agreement with the City of Edina to establish the speed limit for shared local s treets; and, Whereas, St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. Now therefore be it resolved, the mayor and city manager are hereby authorized and directe d for and on behalf of the city to execute and enter into an agreement with the City of Edina for speed limits on shared local streets. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk 1 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDINA AND THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK FOR SPEED LIMITS ON SHARED LOCAL STREETS THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Edina") and the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "St. Louis Park"), with the parties collectively hereinafter referred to as the "Cities". WHEREAS, the existing speed limit on more of the Cities’ streets is 30 miles per hour (mph), which is the statutory speed limit for urban districts; and WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 169.14 authorizes cities to establish speed limits for local streets under their jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the corporate limit between the two Cities intersects multiple streets; and WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 471.59 authorizes two or more government units to enter into agreements to jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to the contracting partings or any similar power; and WHEREAS, the Cities desire to reduce speed limits on their respective local streets to promote safety for all modes of transportation; and WHEREAS, the Cities have each developed a procedure to set speed limits in a consistent and understandable manner, based on safety, engineering and traffic analysis in conjunction with national urban speed limit guidance; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual covenants the parties agree as follows: 1.SPEED LIMITS ON SHARED LOCAL STREETS. The Cities agree to establish speed limits on shared local streets as follows: a) 20 mph on; i) Vernon Avenue between Vermont Street and West 44th Street ii) Mackey Avenue between West 43rd ½ Street and West 44th Street iii) Brook Avenue between West 43rd ½ Street and West 44th Street iv) Coolidge Avenue between West 43rd ½ Street and West 44th Street v) Browndale Avenue between West 43rd ½ Street and West 44th Street Page 3 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4n ) Title: Joint powers agreement with Edina for speed limits on shared local streets 2 vi) Morningside Road between Wooddale and Oakdale Avenues vii) West 42nd Street between Ottawa and Oakdale Avenues viii) Natchez Avenue between West 40th Street and 100’ south of West 41st Street ix) West 40th Street between Natchez and Grimes/Joppa Avenues x) Inglewood Avenue between West 39th Street and Grimes Avenue xi) Glen Place between West 44th Street and 415’ north of West 44th Street b) 25 mph on; i) West 44th Street between Browndale and Grimes Avenues ii) Yosemite/Brookside Avenues between West 44th Street and Brookside Avenue iii) Wooddale Avenue between West 44th Street and Sunnyside Road 2.RULES AND REGULATIONS. The Cities shall abide by Minnesota Department of Transportation standard specifications. 3.SIGNAGE. The Cities agree to install the necessary traffic control signs to communicate the speed limit to the public and will own and maintain signage located within each city’s respective corporate boundaries. 4.ENFORCEMENT. The Cities’ respective police departments shall have equal authority to enforce the speed limits on shared local streets as necessary. 5.FUTURE CHANGES. Any future change to speed limits on shared local streets shall require a supplemental agreement approved by the Cities prior to implementation. 6.INTEGRATION. The entire and integrated agreement of the parties contained in this Agreement shall supersede all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements between Edina and St. Louis Park regarding speed limits; whether written or oral. IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officials. Page 4 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4n ) Title: Joint powers agreement with Edina for speed limits on shared local streets 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK CITY OF EDINA BY: _________________________ BY: __________________________ Its Mayor Its Mayor AND _________________________ AND _________________________ Its City Manager Its City Manager AND _________________________ Its City Clerk Page 5 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4n ) Title: Joint powers agreement with Edina for speed limits on shared local streets Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4o Executive summary Title: Acceptance of the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution accepting the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund established under the American Rescue Plan Act. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept the funds from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA)? Summary: On March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) was signed into law. The relief package provides funding in several areas such as state and local aid, education, rental assistance, transit, stimulus payments for individuals, and other provisions. ARPA provides $350 billion in funding for state and local governments. The City of St Louis Park was awarded approximately $5,1449,268. The attached resolution is asking the City council to approve the award monies. Financial or budget considerations: Accepting the ARPA monies will result in the City being able to use the money for programs and revenue loss due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget and financial status. •St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. •St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood- oriented development. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. •St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Re solution Prepared by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh , interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4o ) Page 2 Title: Acceptance of the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Resolution No. 21-_____ A resolution to accept the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Fund Established under the American Rescue Plan Ac t Whereas, since the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was discovered in the United States in January 2020, the disease has infected over 32 million and killed over 575,000 Americans (“Pandemic”). The disease has impacted every part of life: as social distancing became a necessity, businesses closed, schools transitioned to remote education, travel was sharply reduced, and millions of Americans lost their jobs; Whereas, as a result of the Pandemic cities have been called on to respond to the needs of their communities through the prevention, treatment, and vaccination of COVID-19. whereas, city revenues, businesses and nonprofits in the city have faced economic impacts due to the Pandemic. Whereas, congress adopted the American Rescue Plan Act in March 2021 (“ARPA”) which included $65 billion in recovery funds for cities across the country. Whereas, ARPA funds are intended to provide support to state, local, and tribal governments in responding to the impact of COVID-19 and in their efforts to contain COVID-19 in their communities, residents, and businesses. Whereas, $5,149,268 has been allocated to the City of St Louis Park (“City”) pursuant to the ARPA (“Allocation”). Whereas, the United States Department of Treasury has adopted guidance regarding the use of ARPA funds. Whereas, the City, in response to the Pandemic, has had expenditures and anticipates future expenditures consistent with the Department of Treasury’s ARPA guidance. Whereas, the State of Minnesota will distribute ARPA funds to the city because its population is less than 50,000. N ow therefore , be it resolved by the city council of the city of St. Louis Park, Minnesota as follows: 1.The city intends to collect its share of ARPA funds from the State of Minnesota to use in a manner consistent with the Department of Treasury’s guidance. 2.City staff, together with the mayor and the city attorney are hereby authorized to take any actions necessary to receive the city’s share of ARPA funds from the State of Minnesota for expenses incurred because of the Pandemic. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4o ) Page 3 Title: Acceptance of the Coronavirus Local Fiscal Recovery Funds 3. City staff, together with the mayor and the city attorney are hereby authorized to make recommendations to the city council for future expenditures that may be reimbursed with ARPA funds. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4p Executive summary Title: Resolution to approve off-site gambling for Community Charities of Minnesota Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving Community Charities of Minnesota to conduct off-site gambling on September 25, 2021 at the St. Louis Park ROC, 3700 Monterey Drive. Policy consideration: Does Community Charities of Minnesota meet the requirements to conduct off-site gambling? Summary: Community Charities of Minnesota has submitted an application to conduct off-sit e gambling in connection with ROCtoberfest taking place at the St. Louis Park Recreation Outdoor Center (ROC) on September 25, 2021. Community Charities of Minnesota currently holds a premises permit to conduct lawful gambling at Park Tavern and will provide pull-tabs for this event. ROCtoberfest will also have live music, food, beverages, including beer, and games. State law provides that a licensed organization can conduct lawful gambling on a premises other than the organization’s permitted premises. However, the city is required to approve the off-site request in order for the organization to obtain the required permit from the State Gambling Control Board. Community Charities of Minnesota adhere s to the laws associated with gambling and all requirements have been met for issuance. Should the city council approve, the application and resolution will be forwarded to the State Gambling Control Board who is responsible for issuing the permit. Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Chase Peterson-Etem, office assistant Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Approve d by: Cindy S. Walsh interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4p ) Page 2 Title: Resolution to approve off-site gambling for Community Charities of Minnesota Resolution No. 21-____ Resolution approving application from Community Charities of Minnesota to conduct off premises lawful gambling at the ROC, 3700 Monterey Drive on September 25, 2021 Whereas, all organizations applying for a lawful gambling permit must meet the criteria set forth in St. Louis Park city code, Chapter 15 relating to the location of lawful gambling activities; and Whereas, a licensed organization may not conduct lawful gambling on a premises other than the organization’s permitted premises unless it has first obtained approval as required under state law and obtained approval from the State Gambling Control Board; and Whereas, the board may not issue an off-site permit for a licensed organization to conduct lawful gambling for more than 12 events in a calendar year, not to exceed three (3) days per event; and Now therefore be it resolved, the above application has met the criteria necessary to receive an off-site permit and the St. Louis Park City Council hereby approve the application. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4q Official minutes Planning commission August 4, 2021 – 6:00 p.m. Members present: Jim Beneke (arrived 6:10 p.m.), Imran Dagane (arrived 6:03 p.m.), Matt Eckholm, Jessica Kraft, Sam Tift, Tom Weber, Joffrey Wilson Members absent: none Staff present: Jacquelyn Kramer, Sean Walther G uests: none 1.Call to order – roll call 2.Approval of minutes – July 21, 2021 It was moved by Commissioner Kraft and seconded by Commissioner Weber to approve the minutes of July 21, 2021 as presented . The motion passed unanimously. 3.Hearings 3a. Wat Promwachirayan (Wat Prom) conditional use permit amendment Applicant: Mark Snyder, President, Construction Results Corp. Case No: 21-26-CUP Ms. Kramer presented the report. The applicant proposes to build an addition onto the existing building for their events and festivals. Ms. Kramer stated the application meets all CUP requirements. She noted in person neighborhood meetings were held July 26 and 27, 2021. Commissioner Weber asked where the off-street loading area is. Ms. Kramer stated on the east side of the meditation hall area. Darin Troftgruben, 2544 Highway 100 South, represented the applicant. He noted this structure will allow the temple to save time with setting up for festivals and events. Commissioner Kramer asked if the addition will be storage when not used for an event. Mr. Troftgruben stated yes. Commissioner Kraft asked if there will be bathrooms included in the addition for people attending the festivals . Mr. Troftgruben stated they currently use portable outdoor restrooms and have not discussed indoor bathrooms at this time . C ommissioner Wilson stated it appears the addition will help with efficiencies, safety and security, as it relates to community impacts. Mr. Troftgruben stated that is correct. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4q) Page 2 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 4, 2021 Commissioner Weber stated during festivals the existing parking is used for tents. He asked if the addition will help to move tents off the parking areas. Mr. Troftgruben stated currently the tents are not in the parking area and the parking remains as is. He added they also have arrangements for event parking at Beth El Synagogue and are working to not mix people with cars in their parking lot . Commissioner Weber stated it is helpful that Wat P rom has a connection with Beth El for parking and then folks can use the walking bridge to get to the event. He also asked what future parking plans Wat Prom is discussing. Mr. Troftgruben stated they have not discussed this in depth and plan to use shuttles for their mid -September event. Commissioner Weber encouraged them to keep looking into creative ways to address parking issues in the area. Chair Eckholm opened the public hearing. Dale Anderson, 2700 Vernon Avenue South, stated he is not ave rse to the requests of Wat Prom, but he did want to explain the problem he and neighbors have in the area which is traffic problems and high congestion and issues with many cars in the area. He noted he and several neighbors had people park in front of their driveways and they could not get out of their garages. He added an ambulance could not get across 27th street on the day of their June event. He stated cars were parked on both sides of Utica Avenue going west to east and a fire truck could not get through either. He asked the commission for their help on these very serious traffic issues. Chair Eckholm closed the public hearing. Chair Eckholm stated the traffic continues to be an issue but it sounds like the temple is working hard on this issue . He asked if staff could look into doing no parking areas in the area if the problems persist so folks don’t feel trapped in their neighborhoods. Commissioner Kraft stated she lives in the area as well, and while she has walked over to events, it’s difficult when driving in the area and she would like to know what other options could be looked at such as one side of the street parking. She stated the city will need to work on other parking options as many community members from all over the area come to the event. Commissioner Wilson stated the proposal looks very good, adding he would like to separate the parking issues from the project, because the events will continue with or without the request. He agreed there are issues with the parking and hopes the city and applicant can look into resolving these issues . Commissioner Weber agreed and is hopeful this can be addressed and resolved. Commissioner Weber made a motion, and Commissioner Wilson seconded, to approve the CUP as presented. The motion passed on a vote of 7 to 0. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4q) Page 3 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 4, 2021 4. Other Business - none 5. Communications – Mr. Walther noted immediately following the meeting this evening the planning commission will go into a study session. He added the next meetings will be August 18 and September 1, both with public hearings. 6. Adjournment – 6:23 p.m. Study Session 1. Parking requirements update Ms. Kramer presented the report. Commissioner Weber asked about EV chargers and if they are added only when the development has parking. Ms. Kramer stated one project was updated individually and an EV station was added. She stated staff works to bring projects up to code and these are looked at on a case -by-case basis. Commissioner Beneke asked for more details on the conduit requirement in the ordinance. Ms. Kramer stated the wires can be added to the conduit without digging up the pavement. Chair Eckholm stated he would like to see it updated to level EV 3 chargers at gas stations as well. Ms. Kramer stated level 2 chargers are required at gas stations and level 3 are permitted. Commissioner Weber asked if there are any new gas stations being built since the new parking requirements update and if staff has heard from developers for interest. Mr. Walther added there is one site of interest that the commission will hear about at their next meeting. He added it is a parcel off Highway 100 and Minnetonka Boulevard Mr. Walther added under the current zoning, level 2 would be required if a gas station is built there. Commissioner Weber asked about the intersection noted, and if the businesses in the area depend on EV chargers being added. Ms. Kramer stated parking would most likely be reduced in most businesses. Mr. Walther added with mixed use, shared parking is reviewed in many cases, providing opportunities for peak parking times. Commissioner Weber asked if parking in developments were underground and with fewer spaces, if there is any cost savings. Mr. Walther stated underground spaces are the costliest to build so it would be difficult for the reduced number of spaces to make up the cost. He added the code include s some obscure height and setback bonuses in the parking ordinance to accommodate incorporating parking in the building. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 4q) Page 4 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 4, 2021 Commissioner Eckholm noted that requiring more level 2 EV conduit, for future use, seems logical. Mr. Walther stated conduit is relatively inexpensive. Commissioner Weber and Eckholm suggested an increase to the current conduit requirement from 10% of required parking spaces to 50%. The commissioners generally agreed with increas ing the conduit requirement. Commissioner Wilson asked if there is any mandate for all gas stations to have charging stations by a certain date. Mr. Walther stated unless they are expanding or building new, the city cannot retroactively require legally established uses to meet new requirements. Commissioner Kraft asked if the city regulates outside events parking that is allowed. Mr. Walther stated when an event is planned a special event permit is required. Commissioner Tift added it is important for the city to have the EV chargers visible and asked if there is an initiative within the code for this visibility. Ms. Kramer stated visibility is not specific in the zoning code to keep flexibility. 2. Adjournment – 7:32 p.m. Sean Walther Matt Eckholm ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Sean Walther, liaison Matt Eckholm, chair member Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Consent agenda item: 4r Official minutes Fire civil service commission May 18, 2021 – 9:00 a.m. Members present: Commissioners William MacMillan, Bob Tift and Stuart Williams Members absent: None Staff present: Fire Chief (Mr. Koering), Deputy Fire Chief (Mr. Wolff), Assistant Fire Chief (Mr. Smith), HR Officer (Ms. Timpone), HR Assistant (Ms. Selmer) and IT Technician (Mr. Heddle) Guests: None 1.C all to order President Williams called the commission to order at 9:00 am. 2.Approval of minutes – Fire Civil Service Commission of February 9, 2021 Minutes were approved as distributed. 3.Firefighter Recruitment Process Mr. Wolff presented the recommended recruitment process for the firefighter position. There are currently no vacancies for this position but the current eligibility roster expires in September, 2021. The chiefs discussed the city’s strategic objective for advancing racial equity and how they are attempting to build pathways into the fire career for underrepresented demographics. It was moved by Commissioner Tift, seconded by Commissioner MacMillan, to approve the recruitment process for firefighter as recommended. In a roll call, the motion passed 3-0. 4.Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:16 am. Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Public hearing: 6a Executive summary Title: New Punch Bowl Minneapolis, LLC dba Punch Bowl Social - on-sale intoxicating and Sunday liquor license Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close public hearing. Motion to approve application from New Punch Bowl Minneapolis, LLC dba Punch Bowl Social for an on-sale intoxicating and on-sale Sunday liquor license located at 1691 Park Place Blvd. Policy consideration: Does the applicant meet the requirements for issuance on an on-sale intoxicating and on-sale Sunday liquor license? Summary: New Punch Bowl Minneapolis, LLC dba Punch Bowl Social has submitted an application for an on-sale intoxicating and on-sale Sunday liquor license located at 1691 Park Place Blvd. The city currently licenses Punch Bowl Minneapolis, LLC however the company filed for bankruptcy and is transitioning the license to New Punch Bowl Minneapolis, LLC with the same dba name as before. City code states a public hearing is required for a different licensee at the same premises. Robert Andrew Cornog Jr. and Shakeel Moinuddin Rangrez are listed as principals on the application. A background investigation has been conducted on the new officers and nothing was found that would prevent issuance of the license. Andrew Marson is currently the store manager and will continue to hold this position after the transition. No changes have been made to the space or operations of Punch Bowl Social. Financial or budget considerations: Fees include $500 for the background investigation. The annual fees are $8,750 for the on-sale intoxicating license and $200 for the on-sale Sunday license. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Chase Peterson-Etem, office assistant Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Public hearing: 6b Executive summary Title: Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take testimony, and then close the public hearing. Motion to adopt Resolution approving the establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District (a redevelopment district). (The EDA will have considered establishment of the Beltline Residences TIF District earlier in the evening.) Policy consideration: Does the city council support the establishment of a redevelopment tax increment financing district to facilitate construction of the proposed Beltline Residences mixed-use, mixed-income, transit-oriented development? Summary: A staff report regarding Beltline Residences, LLC’s (an affiliate of Opus Development and “Redeveloper”) application for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance in connection with its proposed Beltline Residences development was provided at the July 26, 2021 study session. As stated in the report, constructing the 250-unit mixed use, mixed income multifamily housing development is not financially feasible but for the use of the proposed tax increment assistance. Given subsequent EDA consensus support, the proposed financial assistance was advanced for formal approval. It is now time to take the final steps in the TIF process which is to formally authorize the establishment of the redevelopment TIF district and approve the related Redevelopment Contract. Such authorizations enable the EDA to designate tax increment generated from the Beltline Residences development as partial reimbursement for certain qualified Public Redevelopment Costs incurred in connection with the construction of the project so as to make it financially feasible. Financial or budget considerations: Authorizing the establishment of the Beltline Residences TIF District does not commit the city to any specific level of financial assistance for the proposed project. Procedurally, it simply creates the funding vehicle to reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of its qualified Public Redevelopment Costs incurred in constructing the proposed development. The terms and amount of TIF assistance are specified within the Redevelopment Contract with Beltline Residences, LLC which is also scheduled for consideration by the EDA September 20, 2021. In addition, an election was made in the proposed district’s TIF Plan to increase the pooling limitations, from 25% to 35%, for affordable housing activities located outside of the geographic area of the TIF District. This will allow the EDA to use more increment from the district for affordable housing initiatives within the city. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion Resolution TIF district overview (provided in the related EDA staff report) Prepared by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director, EDA executive director Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 6b) Page 2 Title: Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District Discussion Background: Beltline Residences, LLC (an affiliate of Opus Development and “Redeveloper”) has a purchase agreement to acquire the nearly four-acre property located at 3440 Beltline Boulevard. The Redeveloper proposes to remove the structurally substandard, 58,000 square foot industrial building and construct a five story, 250-unit mixed-use building with approximately 7,445 square feet of commercial space and six live/work units on the ground floor fronting Beltline Boulevard. Due to high ground water and floodplain, parking will be provided in a three-story, above ground, 320-stall ramp and 32 surface parking stalls. Beltline Residences would be a mixed income housing development with 25 (10 percent) of the units affordable at 50% of area median income (AMI), meeting the city’s inclusionary housing policy requirements. Several three-bedroom units would also be included in the building’s unit mix to assist the city’s goals for family-sized housing. Redeveloper’s request for public financing assistance and TIF Application review: The Redeveloper previously indicated that Beltline Residences’ financial proforma exhibited a gap preventing it from achieving a market rate of return sufficient to attract financing. To offset this gap, the Redeveloper applied to the EDA for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance. Ehlers, the EDA’s financial consultant, examined the project’s pro forma to determine what, if any, level of financial assistance was necessary for the project to become financially feasible. After review, Ehlers determined that up to $5.2 million in TIF assistance is warranted to enable the project to achieve a market rate of return and proceed. Such assistance would be provided via a pay-as- you-go TIF Note and would derive from the establishment of a new redevelopment TIF district. The EDA/city council received a staff report detailing the Redeveloper’s TIF Application at the July 26, 2021 study session along with the recommendation for the level of assistance for which there was consensus support. TIF District Overview and Plan: The attached Tax Increment Financing District Overview summarizes the basic elements of the proposed Beltline Residences TIF District (a redevelopment district). Additional details of the proposed TIF District may be found in the larger Beltline Residences TIF District Plan (available by contacting the Community Development Department). Both the Overview and TIF Plan were prepared by Ehlers. The specific mutual obligations between the EDA and the Redeveloper as well as the specific terms of the financial assistance are contained in the separate Redevelopment Contract between the parties. Both the TIF Plan and the Redevelopment Contract need to be approved for the proposed development to proceed. Synopsis of the proposed Beltline Residences TIF District: In order to provide the Redeveloper with the proposed tax increment, a new redevelopment TIF district needs to be established. The MN TIF Act requires that proposed TIF districts must be located within a city’s Redevelopment Project Area(s). The proposed Beltline Residences TIF District is located within the city’s Redevelopment Project Area, as required. The location of the proposed Beltline Residences TIF District is shown in the map below. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 6b) Page 3 Title: Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District Location of proposed Beltline Residences TIF District The entirety of the tax increment to be provided to the Redeveloper would be derived from the subject redevelopment site which constitutes the proposed redevelopment TIF district. The proposed TIF district includes a single parcel located at 3440 Beltline Boulevard along with adjacent roads and internal rights of-way. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 6b) Page 4 Title: Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District Boundaries of proposed Beltline Residences TIF District Qualifications of the proposed TIF district: Beltline Residences, LLC has a purchase agreement to acquire the nearly four-acre property located at 3440 Beltline Boulevard. The Redeveloper proposes to remove the vacant, structurally substandard industrial building on the property and construct a five story, 250-unit mixed-use building with approximately 7,445 square feet of commercial space (for a possible restaurant and coffee shop) along with three-levels of above ground structured parking. The tax increment to be provided to the proposed development would derive from a newly established redevelopment TIF district. Consulting firm LHB conducted a TIF district feasibility analysis and determined that the proposed TIF district for the Beltline Residences qualified as a redevelopment district under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subdivision 10. The MN TIF Act requires cities to determine if a proposed TIF district is in conformance with its city’s Comprehensive Plan. The current land use guidance for the subject redevelopment site within the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Plan is TOD – transit-oriented City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 6b) Page 5 Title: Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District development. The density and mix of uses within the proposed Beltline Residences development meets the requirements for transit-oriented development land use. Therefore, in the proposed TIF district resolution of approval, there is a statement indicating that the city council finds the proposed Beltline Residences TIF District Plan conforms to the general plan for development of the city. Duration of the proposed TIF district: Under the MN TIF Act, the duration of redevelopment districts is up to 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the city (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The first tax increment for Beltline Residences is expected to be received in 2024. Thus, the full term of the district is estimated to terminate after 2049. The city’s expressed obligations to the Redeveloper, per the terms of the Redevelopment Contract, are estimated to be satisfied in approximately eight years. Once those obligations are satisfied, the EDA and city will have the option to decertify the district or retain it to assist other redevelopment projects in the future. TIF district budget: The Beltline Residences TIF District Plan authorizes the use of tax increment funds generated by the new redevelopment TIF district to reimburse the Redeveloper for qualified Public Redevelopment Costs incurred in connection with the construction of the Beltline Residences. It should be noted that the Sources of Revenue and Uses of Funds within the TIF Plan is a not-to-exceed budget and not the actual expected project budget. The TIF Plan also authorizes the use of tax increment generated by the District to help pay for certain qualifying project expenses and capital improvements associated with the District (such as a traffic signal at the adjacent Beltline Boulevard/Park Glen intersection) should they be proven necessary. In addition, an election was made in the proposed district’s TIF Plan to increase the pooling limitations, from 25% to 35%, for affordable housing activities located outside of the geographic area of the TIF District. This will allow the EDA to use more increment from the district for affordable housing initiatives within the city. Recommendation: The EDA’s financial consultant, Ehlers, prepared the Beltline Residences TIF District Plan in consultation with the EDA’s legal counsel, Kennedy & Graven and staff; all of whom recommend approval of the establishment the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District. Next steps: The redevelopment contract between the EDA and Beltline Residences, LLC which specifies the terms, conditions, and amount of TIF assistance related to the proposed Beltline Residences development is also scheduled for consideration by the EDA on September 20, 2021. Both the TIF Plan and the Redevelopment Contract need to be approved for the proposed development to proceed. Upon receiving such approvals and issuance of the building permit, the Redeveloper plans to commence demolition, environmental remediation and building construction by February 1, 2022. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 6b) Page 6 Title: Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District Resolution No. 21 -____ A resolution approving a modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1, the establishment of Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District; and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan for the TIF District Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”) and the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) have previously established Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Redevelopment Project”) within the City, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through 469.047, as amended, and Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1081, as amended (together, the “Act”); and Whereas, the City and the Authority have proposed to approve a modification to the Redevelopment Plan (the “Plan Modification”) for the Redevelopment Project and a tax increment financing plan (the “TIF Plan”) for the establishment of Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”), a redevelopment district, within the Redevelopment Project, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended (the “TIF Act”), as described in a plan document presented to the City Council of the City (the “City Council”) on the date hereof; and Whereas, pursuant to Section 469.175, subdivision 2 of the TIF Act, the proposed Plan Modification and TIF Plan and the estimates of the fiscal and economic implications of the TIF Plan were presented to the Board of Education of Independent School District No. 283 (St. Louis Park Public Schools) and to the Board of Commissioners of Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “County”) at least 30 days prior to the date of publication of the notice of public hearing on establishment of the TIF District; and Whereas, the City Council has reviewed the contents of the Plan Modification and TIF Plan and on this date conducted a duly noticed public hearing on these documents, at which the views of all interested parties were heard. Now, therefore, be it resolved as follows: Section 1. Findings for the Plan Modification for the Redevelopment Project. (a)It is hereby found and determined that within the Redevelopment Project there exist conditions of obsolescence, underutilization, and inappropriate use of land constituting blight within the meaning of the Act. (b)It is further specifically found and determined that (i) the land within the Redevelopment Project would not be made available for redevelopment without the public intervention and financial assistance described in the Plan Modification; (ii) the Plan Modification will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 6b) Page 7 Title: Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District whole, for the redevelopment of the Redevelopment Project by private enterprise; and (iii) the Plan Modification conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. Section 2. Findings for the Establishment of the TIF District. (a)It is found and determined that it is necessary and desirable for the sound and orderly development of the Redevelopment Project, and for the protection and preservation of the public health, safety, and general welfare, that the authority of the TIF Act be exercised by the City to provide financial assistance to the TIF District and the Redevelopment Project. (b)It is further found and determined, and it is the reasoned opinion of the City, that the development proposed in the TIF Plan could not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future, and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value expected to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan. (c)The proposed public improvements to be financed in part through tax increment financing are necessary to permit the City to realize the full potential of the TIF District and the Redevelopment Project in terms of housing density and diversity and increased tax base. (d)The TIF Plan conforms to the general plan for development of the City as a whole, as the development has gone through extensive planning and zoning approvals and a Planned Unit Development for the development has been approved by ordinance. (e)The TIF Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the TIF District and the Redevelopment Project by private enterprise because it will eliminate blight and blighting factors within the Project and City, enable the construction of diverse housing options, and result in additional availability of affordable housing units. (f)The TIF District is a redevelopment district under Section 469.174, subdivision 10 of the TIF Act. (g)Background information and facts supporting all the above findings are set forth in Appendices C and D of the TIF Plan and are incorporated herein by reference. The City Council has also relied upon reports and recommendations of its staff and consultants, as well as the personal knowledge of members of the City Council, in reaching its conclusions regarding the TIF Plan. Section 2. Public Purpose. The adoption of the TIF Plan conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act. The TIF Plan will help facilitate development that will create diverse housing opportunities and increase the number and availability of affordable housing units in the City, eliminate blighting factors, and improve the tax base. The City expressly finds that any private benefit to be received by a private developer is incidental, as the tax increment assistance is provided solely to make the development financially feasible and thus produce the City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 6b) Page 8 Title: Public hearing - establishment of the Beltline Residences Tax Increment Financing District public benefits described. Therefore, the City finds that the public benefits of the TIF Plan exceed any private benefits. Section 3. Approvals; Further Proceedings. (a) The TIF Plan for the TIF District is hereby approved and adopted in substantially the form on file at City Hall. (b) The City Council authorizes and directs the Authority to file a request for certification of the TIF District with the Taxpayer Division Services Manager of the County and to file a copy of TIF Plan with the Minnesota Commissioner of Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor as required by the TIF Act. (c) The Taxpayer Division Services Manager of the County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the TIF District, as described in the TIF Plan. (d) City staff, advisors, and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the TIF Plan and to negotiate, draft, prepare, and present to the City Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents, and contracts necessary for this purpose. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item: 8a Executive summary Title: 2022 preliminary HRA levy certification Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the 2022 Preliminary HRA Levy. Policy consideration: Does the city council desire to approve as a preliminary levy the full 0.0185% of estimated market value allowable for HRA purposes of $1,517,799? Summary: The HRA levy was originally implemented in St. Louis Park due to legislative changes in 2001 which significantly reduced future tax increment revenues. The city council elected at that time to use the levy proceeds for future infrastructure improvements in redevelopment areas. By law, these funds could also be used for other housing and redevelopment purposes. Given the council’s desire for housing activities, staff recommends the HRA Levy continue at the maximum allowed by law for the 2022 budget year. Both the EDA and City Council must approve the HRA preliminary levy. The HRA Levy cannot exceed 0.0185% of the estimated market value of the city. Therefore, staff has calculated the maximum HRA Levy for 2022 to be $1,517,799 based on valuation data from Hennepin County which is an increase of $80,619 from 2021. Financial or budget considerations: The proposed preliminary HRA levy is $1,517,799 for 2022. Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget. •St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. •St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood- oriented development. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. •St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8a) Page 2 Title: 2022 preliminary HRA levy certification Resolution No. 21-___ Authorizing the preliminary HRA levy for 2021 Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA Act”), the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "Authority"); and Whereas, pursuant to the EDA Act, the city council granted to the Authority all of the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and Whereas, Section 469.033, subdivision 6 of the Act authorizes the Authority to levy a tax upon all taxable property within the city to be expended for the purposes authorized by the HRA Act; and Whereas, such levy may be in an amount not to exceed 0.0185 percent of estimated market value of the city; and Whereas, the Authority has filed its budget for the special benefit levy in accordance with the budget procedures of the city in the amount of $1,517,799; and Whereas, based upon such budgets the Authority will levy all or such portion of the authorized levy as it deems necessary and proper; Now therefore be it resolved by the St. Louis Park City Council: 1.That approval is hereby given for the Authority to levy, for taxes payable in 2022, such tax upon the taxable property of the city as the Authority may determine, subject to the limitations contained in the HRA Act. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item: 8b Executive summary Title: 2022 preliminary EDA levy certification Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the 2022 Preliminary EDA Levy. Policy consideration: Does the city council desire to approve as a preliminary EDA levy 0.00610% of estimated market value allowable for EDA purposes of $500,00? Summary: An EDA levy in the amount of $500,000 or approximately .00610% of estimated market value is being proposed for 2022. The EDA Levy cannot exceed 0.01813% of the estimated market value of the city. Staff has calculated the current $500,000 EDA levy request for 2022 to be approximately .00610% of market valuation data from Hennepin County. This is a new levy for 2022. Financial or budget considerations: The proposed preliminary EDA levy is $500,000 for 2022. Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget. •St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. •St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood- oriented development. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. •St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8b) Page 2 Title: 2022 preliminary EDA levy certification Resolution No. 21-____ Approving a present intent to levy a tax for Economic Development Authority purposes pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.107 Whereas, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1082, as amended (the “Act”), the City established the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “EDA”); and Whereas, Section 469.107, subdivision 1 of the Act authorizes the City, at the request of the EDA, to levy and collect a tax of up to 0.01813% of the estimated market value of taxable property within the City, levied upon all taxable real property within the City, for economic development purposes; and Whereas, the EDA has requested that the City approve such a levy in the amount of .00610% of the estimated market value of taxable property within the City, and the City finds that such a levy is in the best interest of the City and EDA because it will facilitate economic development. Now therefore be it resolved that the City Council hereby approves the levy of a tax for economic development purposes pursuant to Section 469.107, subdivision 1 of the Act in the amount equal to .00610% of the estimated market value of taxable property within the City (expected to be approximately $500,000) with respect to taxes payable in calendar year 2022. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item: 8c Executive summary Title:2022 preliminary property tax levy certification Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving 2022 preliminary property tax levy and setting budget public hearing date for December 6, 2021. Policy consideration: •Does the city council desire to set the 2022 preliminary property tax levy at $38,695,821, which is a 6.50% increase over the 2021 final property tax levy? •Does the city council desire to hold the public hearing at which the budget and levy will be discussed on Monday, Dec. 6, 2021 and then take action on the 2022 budgets, final property tax levy, final HRA levy, final EDA levy, and 2022-2031 capital improvement plan at the regular city council meeting on Dec. 20, 2021? Summary: Included is information pertaining to the 2022 preliminary property tax levy. Council has had several budget discussions throughout 2021 including most recently on August 23rd. Future budget and tax levy discussions and decision dates are laid out in the discussion portion of the report. Once the preliminary levy is set, it can be decreased but not increased. As we move ahead with our 2022 budget process and planning, we will continue to have discussions and provide more information prior to the Dec. 6 public hearing and final adoption on Dec. 20. The city manager will continue to work with directors to finalize recommendations and provide additional information to council. Financial or budget considerations: The proposed tax levy will support necessary city services to be provided in 2022. Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget. •St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. •St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-oriented development. •St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. •St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Discussion Resolution Prepared by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8c) Page 2 Title: 2022 preliminary property tax levy certification Discussion Background: On May 10, 2021, staff met with the city council to discuss the 2022 budget process, tax levy and initial challenges seen for 2022. Staff has prepared the recommendations based on continued quality and timely delivery of core services in addition to continuing to support and align with the five strategic priorities and the key organizational cultural behaviors of collaboration, quality and responsiveness when preparing the 2022 budget. At the July 12, and August 23, 2021 city council study sessions, the city council reviewed information regarding the 2022 budget. At the August 23rd study session staff was directed to prepare for council approval a 2022 preliminary property tax levy that represented a 6.5% increase when compared to the 2021 final property tax levy. It was made clear by the council that the goal was to adopt a final levy in December that was lower than the preliminary levy. The premise behind adopting the preliminary levy at the amount proposed was to give the council flexibility over the coming weeks to further discuss the 2022 budget, capital needs and other financial issues prior to adopting the final budget, capital plan and levy in December. 2021 city final levy and 2022 city preliminary levy A synopsis of prior year levy information and the 2022 proposed preliminary levy is shown below: 1.The 2021 preliminary levy was $36,895,000 which was 6.11% more than 2020. 2.The 2021 final levy was $36,335,325, which was 4.5% more than 2020. 3.Considering the budgets which have been submitted, strategic priorities, debt service needs and the financial planning process, the 2022 preliminary property tax levy is proposed at 6.5%. Additional tax levy information: By law, the city council is required to approve a 2022 preliminary property tax levy which must be certified to Hennepin County by September 30, 2021. Hennepin County will mail out parcel specific notices in mid to late November. Tax Impacts: We have fiscal disparity and TIF numbers from the county and were able to update our estimates. Remember these are just a general idea of what residents may see, every property is different due to the value appreciation/depreciation. 2021 2022 $ Change % Change Final Levy Proposed 2021 to 2022 2021 to 2022 TAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVY General Fund 29,601,811 30,862,541 1,260,730 4.3% Park Improvement Fund 860,000 860,000 - 0.0% Capital Replacement Fund 1,312,700 1,575,240 262,540 20.0% Debt Service 4,410,815 5,248,040 837,225 19.0% Employee Benefits Fund 150,000 150,000 - 0.0% TOTAL TAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVIES 36,335,326 38,695,821 2,360,495 6.5% City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8c) Page 3 Title: 2022 preliminary property tax levy certification Residential general levy All-inclusive residential (6.5% general, HRA, EDA levies) Apartments (median class A, B, C values) general levy Commercial/industrial (median values) general levy Setting dates for public hearing and 2021 budget adoption: The city is required to hold a regularly scheduled meeting at which the budget and levy will be discussed, and public input is allowed, prior to final budget and levy determination. This public input meeting must occur after November 24, 2021. Past practice has been to hold the public input meeting and then schedule a subsequent meeting to adopt the final budget. If the city council chooses to continue this practice, then the dates would be the regular meeting on December 6, 2021 for the public input meeting and December 20, 2021 for adoption of the 2022 budget, tax levy, HRA levy, and 2022-2031 capital improvement plan. Next steps: Once the preliminary levy is set, city manager will continue to work with staff and council to set the final levy. In the past years, council typically reduces this preliminary levy as they work towards finalizing all the information for 2022. Again, preliminary levy can be reduced, not increased when set in December for the upcoming year. The following preliminary timeline has been developed for council: 2021 For Estimated $ P ay 2022 2022 Change City tax Annual 254,600 1,061.64 123.15 286,500 1,272.02 167.48 336,000 1,420.10 148.12 382,100 1,667.38 206.94 527,050 2,317.19 157.98 6.5% increase 2021 For Estimated $ P ay 2022 2022 Change Market Value City tax Annual Class A 47,671,000 264,445 6,736 Class B 9,066,960 50,128 2,613 Class C 1,861,000 9,866 257 6.5% increase 2021 For Estimated $ Pay 2022 2022 Change City tax Annual Commercial 637,000 3,540 76 Industrial 1,093,000 5,940 129 6.5% increase 2021 For Estimated $ Pay 2022 2022 Change Market Value all City tax Annual 254,600 1,116.46 140.51 286,500 1,337.69 189.07 336,000 1,482.53 159.79 382,100 1,740.68 221.96 527,050 2,436.83 191.45 6.5% increase City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8c) Page 4 Title: 2022 preliminary property tax levy certification September 20 Council establishes 2022 preliminary property tax levies. (Levies can be reduced, but not increased for final property tax levies.) September 27 Utility rate study presentation and discussion October 11 Review and discussion of 2022 budget, CIP, utility rates, and LRFMP. Directors or their designees in attendance as needed. October 18 Public hearing – 1st reading of ordinance setting fees, and adoption of 2022 utility rates. Resolution creating climate investment fund. Resolution assigning fund balance and authorizing fund balance transfers. November 1 2nd reading of ordinance setting fees and adoption of 2022 fees inclusive of utility rates November 8 Final budget or CIP discussion prior to truth in taxation public hearing and budget presentation. Second reading of ordinance setting fees. December 6 Truth in Taxation Public Hearing and budget presentation December 13 (if necessary) Continuation of public hearing and any budget discussion. December 20 Council adopts 2022 budgets, final tax levies (City, HRA, EDA), and 2022 - 2031 CIP. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8c) Page 5 Title: 2022 preliminary property tax levy certification Resolution No. 21-____ Resolution approving 2022 preliminary property tax levy, and setting public hearing date for the 2022 budget and final property tax levy Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park is required by Charter and State law to approve a resolution setting forth an annual tax levy to the Hennepin County Auditor; and Whereas, Minnesota Statutes require approval of a preliminary property tax levy on or before September 30th of each year; and Whereas, the city council has received the proposed budget information; and Whereas, there are sufficient funds on hand, the 2022 debt levy is reduced from $5,618,732 to $5,248,040; Be it further resolved that the truth in taxation public hearing will be held on December 6, 2021; and Be it further resolved that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied for collection in 2021 upon the taxable property in said City of St. Louis Park for the following purposes: And Be it further resolved that the chief financial officer is hereby authorized and directed to transmit this information to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Revenue, if applicable, in the format requested as required by law. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk TAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVY General Fund 30,862,541 Park Improvement Fund 860,000 Capital Replacement Fund 1,575,240 Debt Service 5,248,040 Employee Benefits Fund 150,000 TOTAL TAX CAPACITY BASED TAX LEVIES 38,695,821 Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item: 8d Executive summary Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Recommended action: •Motion to adopt Resolution approving the amendment to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map, as well as related figures, tables and text. •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance amending the zoning map from C-1 neighborhood commercial and R-3 two-family residence to R-4 multiple family residence and set the second reading for October 4, 2021. Policy consideration: Does city council support the proposed land use and zoning changes? Summary: The City of St. Louis Park proposes re-guiding and rezoning the undeveloped land on the northwest corner of Highway 100 and Minnetonka Boulevard in order to allow medium- density residential development on the site. Staff held a virtual neighborhood meeting on August 12, 2021. Most of the attendees expressed support of the proposed changes, a few had mixed opinions and one opposed the change. Staff received written a letter of support from one person before the planning commission public hearing. Planning commission held a public hearing on August 18, 2021. Seven people gave testimony on the proposal and the commission recommended approval of the applications 5 to 0 (two commissioners absent). Following the planning commission, staff continued to receive written correspondence, which is attached to the report for city council consideration. The comments include a mix of supporters and opponents to the proposed changes. Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion Comprehensive plan amendment resolution Zoning map amendment ordinance Public feedback July 26, 2021 city council study session report Prepared by: Jacquelyn Kramer, associate planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager Karen Barton, community development director Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 2 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Discussion Background: The subject property is currently undeveloped land located at the northwest corner of Highway 100 and Minnetonka Blvd. The site has access to Vernon Avenue South and potentially Utica Avenue South. Although it fronts Minnetonka Boulevard, it would not be allowed driveway access onto the county road. A gas station, including convenience store and car wash, previously operated at the site until around 2014, when the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) condemned the property for highway purposes. MNDOT will likely eventually sell the remaining property. The site has been zoned for commercial or business use since at least 1949. In 2019, the property was rezoned from C-2 general commercial to C-1 neighborhood commercial as part of a comprehensive rezoning following adoption of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The change was initiated by the city because of the community’s interest in smaller scale buildings and neighborhood commercial uses generally and recognizing the access changes to this lot specifically. The northerly 80 feet or so of the subject property adjacent to the one- and two-family houses was previously part of the freeway exit ramp connecting to Vernon Avenue. That land is still guided right-of-way in the comprehensive plan and zoned R-3 two-family residence. The Utica Avenue road segment ending in a cul-de-sac at the subject property is about 960 feet long and our subdivision ordinance typically limits dead end streets to 500 feet in length. Site information: Minnetonka Boulevard Highway 100 Vernon Ave S subject property Utica Ave S City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 3 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Site area (acres): approximately 1.2 Current use: undeveloped Surrounding land uses: North: One- and two-family residential East: Highway 100 South: Minnetonka Boulevard, apartments, commercial West: One-family residential Current 2040 land use guidance Current zoning COM - commercial C-1 neighborhood commercial ROW - right of way R-3 two-family residence Proposed 2040 land use guidance Proposed zoning RM - medium density residential R-4 multiple-family residence Present considerations: City council has directed staff to initiate the public process to re-guide the future land use to medium density residential and rezone the site to R-4 multiple family residence district. Please see the July 26, 2021 city council study session report link at the beginning of this report for more details. The following changes are proposed: 1.Amend the 2040 comprehensive plan land use map to change the future land use designation of the site from commercial and right-of-way to medium density residential and right-of-way. 2.Amend the zoning map to rezone the property from C-1 neighborhood commercial and R-3 two-family residence to R-4 multiple family residence. Comprehensive plan amendment: The city proposes a change to the future land use designation of the site from commercial and right-of-way to medium density residential. The majority of the site would be re-guided from right of way and commercial to medium density residential land uses. A portion of the east side of the site would be re-guided from commercial to right-of-way to recognize the expanded Highway 100 right-of-way. Below is an excerpt from the comprehensive plan future land use map. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 4 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 A request to amend the city’s future land use plan and zoning map should be evaluated from the perspective of land use planning principles and community goals. These reflect the community’s long-range vision and broad goals about what kind of community it wants to be and what makes strong neighborhoods. This request is not driven by a specific development proposal, but rather the broad goals, policies and implementation strategies in the comprehensive plan. These elements are the basis for evaluating the requested change. Relevant comprehensive plan land use goals and strategies: Residential land use goal #1: Create a mix of residential land uses and housing types to increase housing choices, including affordable housing, and increase the viability of neighborhood services through redevelopment or infill development. Strategy B. Promote and support the development of medium and high-density residential land uses near commercial centers and nodes. Strategy C. Ensure that new and redeveloped medium and high-density residential land uses are located within walking distance of transit and commercial services. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 5 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Availability of infrastructure: The proposed comprehensive plan amendment would not have a negative effect on city and regional infrastructure. Water, sewer, and stormwater systems can accommodate the scale of development that could occur under the proposed land use guidance. Hennepin County staff indicated the county would not support any driveway accesses onto Minnetonka Boulevard, and city staff concur that this would diminish the bicycle and pedestrian improvements to the corridor and the traffic safety and congestion mitigation improvements that have been made to the corridor in this area. Lack of driveway access onto Minnetonka Boulevard limits the potential for commercial redevelopment on the site but presents less of a challenge for residential development. The existing street network can accommodate the scale and density of development that would be allowed under the proposed land use guidance. Impacts to surrounding properties and the physical character of the neighborhood The Minnetonka Boulevard corridor has primarily residential and institutional land uses along it. About every ½-mile there is a small neighborhood commercial node, including at Texas Avenue, Louisiana Avenue, Dakota Avenue, Lake Street/Highway 100, Ottawa Avenue and France Avenue. The spacing benefits surrounding residents, because they have access to goods and services within a ¼-mile walk. The comprehensive plan indicates these neighborhood commercial areas may offer attractive opportunities for adding new housing options. The proposed comprehensive plan amendment would not result in any short-term changes to the site. Long-term, the change would allow for medium family residential development that is well-served by nearby commercial nodes and transit. Medium family residential development on this site is compatible with nearby residential and commercial uses. This type of redevelopment would help support land use and housing goals in the 2040 comprehensive plan. Staff finds the goals and policies of the 2040 comprehensive plan support guiding this property for medium density residential. Regional policy: Metropolitan Council review of this comprehensive plan amendment is required. The Metropolitan Council must authorize the city to put the amendment into effect. Staff expects that a change to allow a residential density of up to 30 units per acre would be viewed favorably by Metropolitan Council. As part of Metropolitan Council’s approval process, the city’s household and population forecasts will be adjusted to accommodate the proposed land use guidance change and reflect recently released 2020 Census data. Zoning map amendment: The city proposes a zoning map amendment to rezone the property from C-1 neighborhood commercial and R-3 two-family residence to R-4 multiple-family residence. Below is an excerpt from the zoning map showing the boundaries of the existing zoning and the proposed change. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 6 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Zoning analysis: The following is an analysis of the zoning requirements for the current and proposed zoning districts of the site. Uses: Rezoning the southern portion of the property from C-1 to R-4 would prevent the previously allowed commercial uses to occur on the site, including a motor fuel station. Rezoning the northern portion of the property from R-3 to R-4 would allow multi-family development, as well as the single-family and duplex uses that are already allowed in the R3 district. No non-conformities would result from the proposed rezoning, and the R-4 zoning district allows for medium and low-density residential uses which are compatible with the existing residential uses on adjacent sites. Housing density: The R-3 zoning district allows up to 11 units per acre but does not allow multi- family housing development. The C-1 zoning district allows residential uses up to 30 units per acre, but only as part of a vertical mixed-use development. There are currently very few, if any, mixed-use developments in the C-1 zoning district that include multiple family residential. On a one-acre site, accommodating parking for both the commercial and residential uses would be challenging even with structured parking. If the city’s goal or expectation for development of the subject property is that new development must include residential, the C-1 district may not produce that result even though it is allowed. The R-4 zoning district allows up to 30 units per acre with a conditional use permit and does not require mixed-use development. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 7 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Rezoning the property from C-1 and R-3 to R-4 would result in an increase in the maximum housing density of the site and therefore the maximum number of housing units. Dimensional requirements: Below is a table comparing some of the dimensional standards in the current and proposed zoning districts. Standard C-1 district R-3 district R-4 district Building height 3 stories or 35 feet 3 stories or 35 feet 3 stories or 40 feet Setbacks: Front 5 feet 25 feet 30 feet Side 5 feet 5-9 feet 15 feet Rear 20 feet 25 feet 25 feet Neighborhood meeting: Staff held a virtual neighborhood meeting on August 12, 2021. About ten residents attended the meeting as well as city staff and Councilmember Rog. The group discussed traffic generation, site access, and the benefits and drawbacks of potential residential and commercial uses on the site. The city approval process, MnDOT’s ownership of the land, and the role of the previous property owner in the process were also discussed. Most of the attendees expressed support of the proposed changes. Some attendees preferred to keep the site guided and zoned for commercial uses, hoped to see a business serving neighborhood needs on the site, and expressed concerned about higher density residential uses in this location. Public hearing: Planning commission held a public hearing on August 18, 2021. Seven people testified. Comments during the hearing were mixed; some residents supported multi-family development on the site, some preferred to see a gas station return to the site, and a few wanted a different use that would generate less traffic. The commission discussed what aspects of future development on the site the city could control. The commission also discussed the existing and future traffic and access conditions of the site. The commission unanimously recommended approval of the proposed changes. Public feedback: City staff have received 14 letters regarding the proposed changes. Feedback on the proposal has been mixed, with some residents supporting the change to allow multi- family development, and some residents preferring to see a gas station or other neighborhood commercial use on the site. Please review the attached letters. Next steps: If approved, city council would hold a second reading of the zoning map amendment ordinance on October 4, 2021, and staff would submit the comprehensive plan amendment to Metropolitan Council. Recommendations: Planning commission and staff recommend approval of the comprehensive plan amendment. Planning commission and staff recommend approval of the zoning map amendment to rezone the site to R-4 Multiple-Family Residences. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 8 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Resolution No. 21-____ Resolution supporting the approval of an amendment to the 2040 comprehensive plan for the City of St. Louis Park under Minnesota Statues 462.351 to 462.364 for the property located at the northwest corner of Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Whereas, the 2040 Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the City Council on August 5, 2019; and Whereas, the use of said Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and will promote the public health, safety and general welfare; and Whereas, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change, thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures; and Whereas, said Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government; and Whereas, said Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the City of St. Louis Park Planning Commission and amendments made, if justified according to procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended adoption of an amendment to said Plan on August 18, 2021; and Whereas, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission; and Whereas, the contents of Planning Case File 21-29-CP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case; and Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of St. Louis Park that said Plan, as previously adopted by the City Council, is hereby amended as follows and as shown in the attached exhibits: Change the future land use designation for the property at the northwest corner of Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 from COM – Commercial and ROW – Right of Way to RM – Medium Density Residential and ROW – Right of Way; Changes to the text, tables and figures within the 2040 Comprehensive Plan document as shown in the attachments to reflect updates to city forecasts and development phasing based on the change in land use; changes within the document are found on the following pages: 5-126 and 5-129. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 9 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 It is further resolved city staff are instructed to submit the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council for review and authorization to place the Comprehensive Plan Amendment into effect. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 10 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 5-126: Figure 5-5. 2040 Future Land Use Plan City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 11 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 5-129: Table 5.2 2040 Future Land Use Plan Future Land Use Gross Acres Net Acres % Net RL - Low Density Residential 2,520.67 2,484.21 35.96% RM - Medium Density Residential 396.31 397.44 380.05 381.18 5.50% 5.52% RH – High Density Residential 220.19 211.55 3.06% MX - Mixed Use 52.81 52.81 0.76% TOD - Transit Oriented Development 81.76 81.76 1.18% COM - Commercial 255.41 254.77 255.08 254.44 3.69% 3.68% OFC - Office 232.31 215.16 3.11% BP - Business Park 103.81 103.65 1.50% IND - Industrial 237.82 199.64 2.89% CIV - Civic 213.85 208.26 3.01% PRK - Park and Open Space 916.67 557.54 8.07% ROW - Right of Way 1,517.14 1,516.78 1,508.78 1,508.42 21.84% 21.83% RRR - Railroad 159.98 150.81 2.18% Water/Wetlands - 499.45 7.23% Total 6,908.74 6,908.74 100.00% City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 12 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Ordinance No. ___-21 Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park official zoning map The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. The city council has considered the advice and recommendation of the planning commission (Case No. 21-30-ZA). Section 2. The St. Louis Park official zoning map is hereby amended by changing the zoning district boundary to reclassify the property described below and shown in Exhibit A from C-1 Neighborhood Commercial and R-3 Two-family Residence to R-4 Multiple-family Residence: Lots 15, 16, and the southerly 27.3 feet of Lot 17, Auditor’s Subdivision No. 351 And That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 31, Township 29, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying westerly of the southerly extension of the east line of said Lot 16, lying northerly of the easterly extension of the south line of said Lot 16, and lying southeasterly of the southeasterly line of said Lot 16 And Extending to the centerlines of adjacent streets Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon Metropolitan Council authorization of the associated comprehensive plan amendment approved by City Council Resolution 21-____ and not sooner than 15 days after publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council October 4, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading September 20, 2021 Second reading October 4, 2021 Date of publication October 14, 2021 Date ordinance takes effect Upon Metropolitan Council authorization of the associated comprehensive plan amendment and no sooner than October 29, 2021. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Page 13 Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Exhibit A: Excerpt from zoning map Re: Land use of the property on the NW corner of the intersection of Mtka Blvd and Highway 100 We are responding to the call for neighborhood comment on the proposal to change this acre-or-so of vacant land from commercial to residential. We applaud this intended land use change. Our family has lived several houses north of the property on Vernon Avenue for 35 years. There our children were born and raised to adulthood. We might someday be carried out the door by our feet; meanwhile we are rooted in the Birchwood neighborhood. Needless to say, we know the lay of this land intimately and have watched it change over the decades. Whatever the shifting breezes, Vernon Avenue has all this time had one stable characteristic as the main and most well-travelled artery of the neighborhood, drawing traffic in and out from both the north and south. While COVID-related traffic patterns have softened temporarily, Vernon has been subjected to much more than neighborhood use. During rush hour numerous commuters leave Highway 100 and travel down Stephens Drive to Vernon to escape the bumper-to-bumper highway mess going south. Vernon is their chosen funnel to other neighborhoods south and west. Needless to say, the busy intersection of Vernon-cum-Lake Street and Minnetonka Blvd is not begging for a new commercial development whose driveway will meet Vernon within several tens of feet of that already congested dot on the map. One hears that Holiday is sniffing the corner with intent to build another gas station on that postage stamp of land. Another gas station?! There are already fully four gas stations within a mile of that place, one of them directly across the street. A psychiatrist should be invited in to talk about such a plan. The last time the Birchwood neighborhood was subjected to a plan for a new commercial establishment, it was preceded by quiet offers to owners of at least seven homes bounded by Minnetonka Blvd and Vernon and Webster Avenues. Those offers had been hidden under the cloak of non-disclosure agreements, but a light was shined on them at a city-convened public meeting. A New Jersey man in a sharkskin suit, of all things, stood in for his corporate employer to tout the benefits of placing a new CVS on that residential property. Among his assurances was that Minnetonka Blvd would be protected from the bright lights of the parking lot because most of those lights would illuminate the neighborhood! This was not a comedy show … and neither would it be one for those of us on Vernon Avenue if a new commercial development invited increased traffic to this corner. The bright lights of the old Holiday station that occupied that spot when it was larger are a bad memory for the neighbors. Fortunately, we have in our city some who are working to fill a need for a renewed residential nature in this community. This comes also at a time when other Twin Cites communities are also confronting the residential need [see Star Tribune analysis of the issue in the August 8 issue entitled ZONING DIVIDE]. Whatever the merits of one kind of home or another, a residential result for this corner of our neighborhood would be uplifting. We stand with those on our city council that have brought this zoning matter to the table. The Birchwood neighborhood will be blessed by such an outcome. Jon and Jean Olson 7/12/21 2919 Vernon Ave City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 14 From:H. John Hein To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Minnetonka Vernon Property Date:Monday, August 16, 2021 9:34:27 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. i wish to record my disapproval of the City's desire to change the zoning on the former Holiday gas station site on Minnetonka and Vernon Avenue. The property was taken under eminent domain. If the property is not to be used for the purpose it was taken, the previous owner should have first right of refusal to purchase the property. If that party did not to wish to purchase it then I would have no complaint at that time to rezoning. Rezoning to prevent the previous owner the opportunity to restore it to its original use appears to me to be an overreach by our City Council and perhaps while legal, appears underhanded. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 15 From:Carolynn Bieker To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Mntka Blvd &100 Proposal Date:Monday, August 16, 2021 7:02:42 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I say no to more housing projects in SLP, put in a pollination garden or a Holiday gas station. Stop spending tax payer dollars too! thx CJ Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 16 From:Sally Stewart To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:hwy 100 + Minnetonka corner Date:Tuesday, August 17, 2021 9:57:39 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. As a 2816 Utica homeowner, we terribly miss our corner Holiday Station. We were so sad to see it come down, leaving us only with the incredibly sketchy Marathon station that I will not let the kids run down to for a treat and has outdated, expired and very limited product. This Birchwood community is full of kids, youth, young adults, families etc and a quality convenience store (exactly like the one that was taken down) that everyone can use without crossing the busy highway would be a huge benefit to us. Also very against the idea of additional apartment housing on that corner. We already have traffic moving much too heavily on our street (2800 Utica) for the kids and more traffic would be a nightmare. Thanks for listening. -- Sally Stewart City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 17 From:James Hughes To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Zoning change to hwy100 and mtka Blvd Date:Tuesday, August 17, 2021 3:26:45 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello- I would like to just quickly comment on the vacant lot off mtka Blvd and hwy 100 as I won’t be able to attend the meeting on 8/18. I would love to see this stay as a commercial zone if it means a gas station would return to the land. We do have other gas stations in the area but that one was special as it was an excellent convenience store, which we have none of nearby. The marathon and speedways nearby, and even the holiday off hwy 7, are all terrible for grocery and convenience shopping, so would love to see a new shop go in there as it would make life much easier for me. If you are not the right audience and this commentary needs to go to someone else please let me know. Thanks -James Hughes City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 18 From:Sandra Woessner To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Preference for old holiday site.... Date:Wednesday, August 18, 2021 2:42:05 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I would like to go on the record as saying that I think changing zoning just to stop someone from developing a commercial property because some SLP homes don't want increased traffic seems like a bad idea. I think acting in bad faith towards a commercial entity will discourage businesses from choosing SLP. I also think the legal risks from this maneuver are greater than the city attorney is stating. Further, the city doesn't seem to be able to finish the housing we have started (Place) why start another project until we get what we have going straightened out? -- Sandra L. Woessner Woessner Law Office, P.A. 11670 Fountains Drive, Suite 200 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763 391 7711 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 19 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 20 From:Margaret Rog To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Fwd: Aug 12 zoning meeting Date:Sunday, August 22, 2021 9:02:45 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Jacquelyn. These residents said they supported my sharing this email to be included in the public comments. Thanks. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Donald Janke <donaldejanke@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 12:23 PM Subject: Aug 12 zoning meeting To: Margaret Rog <rogforslp@gmail.com> Hi, We live next to the Rogers station site and are, and have been, out of town. Today we were able to listen to the Aug 12 meeting. I found it very helpful to the understanding of what the rules are for what may happen. I think there were a lot of points made for problems that would develop with the failure to rezone the site as residential, That in itself will be a problem for us if it results in a large building that casts a shadow on our land, land which is problematic for land that was originally filled in by the city with pieces of asphalt and concrete dumped there to make a lot for the construction of our duplex. I definitely got the feeling that you understand the problems that would be created by the failure to rezone it. Thank you for being aware and defending our positions and being willing to guard against traffic problems, trash problems, shadowing, etc. It's too bad it can’t stay a wild area where people walk their dogs but we know that is not possible. Keep up the fight! Don and Patty Janke 2957 Vernon Ave So -- Margaret Rog (she/her) City Council Member Ward 1, St. Louis Park www.rogforslp.com City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 21 From:Margaret Rog To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Fw: Minnetonka Blvd/Highway 100 redevelopment Date:Tuesday, August 24, 2021 10:35:28 AM Hi Jacquelyn, please add this to the public comment collection re: former Holiday site. Linnae is in support of this being included. Thanks! Margaret Margaret Rog (she/her) Council Member - Ward 1 mrog@stlouispark.org (612) 928-1447 (o) (612) 590-1806 (c) From: Linnae Stole <lbstole@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2021 10:29 AM To: Margaret Rog <mrog@stlouispark.org> Subject: Minnetonka Blvd/Highway 100 redevelopment CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Margaret, I wasn't entirely sure where to go to share my thoughts on the discussion on redevelopment of the Holiday Station parcel, but figured you were the best bet since I am a homeowner in Ward 1, 2667 Alabama Ave S. Basically, I'd like to add my voice to those who oppose turning that corner back into a gas station. My reasoning is this: in the 8 years I've lived in St. Louis Park (5 as a renter and 3 now as a homeowner), I've seen the city increasing its focus on walkability and biking infrastructure. That's one of the reasons I moved here initially. I appreciate the fact that each year I can get more and more places safely on a bike even living in a more suburban feeling neighborhood. Bringing a gas station back to that corner, along with the increased traffic it would entail, seems counterintuitive to the City's goals of making it safer for bikers and walkers to get around. I've been looking forward to the conversations around the Highway 100 to France Avenue redevelopment, because of the possibility for things like on street bike lanes and a safer bike connection to the bridge over Highway 7 from my neighborhood. Bringing a gas station back to that corner would bring more traffic from people outside the neighborhood who City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 22 don't have a vested interest in the community. While I'd love more green space or small businesses, at least changing it to residential zoning would provide a place for people to live in and contribute to the community. And if it turns out that it's an apartment complex that goes in, maybe people who live there will eventually choose or be in a position to purchase a home in the community, which in my mind is a positive (that's what happened to me!). Thanks so much for listening! Linnae Stole 2667 Alabama Ave S, St. Louis Park City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 23 From:Barb Patterson To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Mntka and Hwy 100 Development Date:Thursday, August 19, 2021 4:13:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Ms. Kramer. I am a resident of the Browndale neighborhood and would like to express my preference that the development at Minnetonka Boulevard and Hwy 100 be a multifamily unit that maximizes 3 bedroom units and accepts low-income residents to the extent that is possible in St. Louis Park. In spite of all the recent development, there is a shortage of affordable housing that can serve families, which is why I have a preference for a multifamily unit. My second choice would be some type of low-income single family units that might promote home ownership. Thank you for accepting comments on this. Barb Patterson City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 24 From:Chelsea Horton To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Hwy 100 & Mtka Date:Saturday, August 21, 2021 7:03:04 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Jennifer, I live in Fern Hill and would like to see the holiday gas station and c store return to highway 100 and minnetonka blvd. I've heard it said that there are several gas stations nearby however the ones we have don't have adequate c- store amenities such as food, decent coffee and none have a vacuum (most no car wash either). I have been flummoxed by this and generally end up driving further west for all of these reasons. Please make sure the neighbors voices are heard. This is not a good intersection for multi family housing and more traffic. Let's make the neighborhood more convenient for those that do live here. Thanks, Chelsea Horton 2724 Kipling Ave, St Louis Park MN 55416 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 25 From:Margaret Rog To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Fw: NW corner of HiWay 100/Minnetonka Blvd Date:Saturday, August 28, 2021 10:57:46 AM For inclusion in public comments. Thanks! Margaret Rog (she/her) Council Member - Ward 1 mrog@stlouispark.org (612) 928-1447 (o) (612) 590-1806 (c) From: Patricia Betlach <betlap@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2021 4:58 PM To: Margaret Rog <mrog@stlouispark.org> Subject: NW corner of HiWay 100/Minnetonka Blvd CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Margaret, I was unable to attend or call in for the meeting last week, and hope to find time to listen to the audio recording. It is difficult to consider what would be the best use of the land and in the best interest of the city and the neighborhood, and I know that you will consider all options. I have lived at 2900 Utica since 1989 – just 4 houses away from that land. I loved Roger’s and understand that it would not be feasible to have a gas station there without access to a driveway on Minnetonka Blvd. Using that intersection on a regular basis, I already find it difficult as drivers coming from Lake Street cross over 3 lanes when going East on Minnetonka Blvd. Drivers exiting HiWay 100 from the North also cross 3 lanes immediately to turn Left onto Lake Street. We need to be hyper-aware at that intersection as cars move around. That leads me to be opposed to having a large multi-family housing building at that site with access only from Vernon Avenue and so close to the existing intersection. I would be very supportive of a couple of single family or 2-story duplex types of homes, limiting the number of vehicles coming and going in and around our neighborhood. St. Louis Park and other communities do need more affordable housing units and I support that concept in areas where access is safe. Thank you for representing our Ward and I hope to be able to participate in providing comments as you do your best to help reach a consensus about what is best for the city and the neighborhood! Thank you, Patti Betlach City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 26 From:Ela Justman To:Jacquelyn Kramer Subject:Mtka Blvd/Hwy 100 Holiday Gas Station Lot Zoning Opinion: Date:Saturday, August 28, 2021 9:48:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, I missed the opportunity to voice my opinion on the 18th, but would like to share via email. I'm a 13 year Birchwood home owner, family with a 4 year old child. And, I wish to not have the land zoned for residential. We have way too many condos/apartments already as it is and this particular location is not suited well for multi-unit structure. We loved when it was holiday gas station. The gas stations currently in close proximity is not well maintained and we avoid using it. I would still be content in having it zoned as commercial if Holiday backs out. Thank you, Ela Justman City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8d) Title: Land use and zoning changes at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100 Page 27 Meeting: City council Meeting date: September 20, 2021 Action agenda item: 8e Executive summary Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Recommended action: •Motion to adopt Resolution approving the preliminary and final plat for Belt Line Industrial Park 3rd Addition (requires four affirmative votes); and •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance adding section 36-268-PUD 21 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from MX-1 vertical mixed-use to PUD 21 and set the second reading for October 4, 2021 (requires five affirmative votes). Policy consideration: Does city council support the proposed development? Summary: Roers Companies proposes Risor, a new development at 3510 Beltline Blvd. The proposal is for a six-story, mixed-use apartment development with 177 residential units, 240 stalls of structured parking, ground floor residential lobby and amenities, 14 ground floor live- work dwelling units and 4,100 square feet of ground floor commercial space. The development would be an age restricted 55 and older community with 10% of the units affordable at 50% of the area median income. The building will have a south facing roof top amenity deck, as well as a sky lounge with views of Bass Lake Preserve. The applicant submitted applications for a preliminary and final plat to create one developable lot and a preliminary and final planned unit development (PUD), which is a zoning map and zoning text amendment to create a new PUD zoning district specific to the property and proposed uses. The planning commission held a public hearing on September 1, 2021. No public comments were made. The commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat and preliminary and final PUD. Financial or budget considerations: None. Requests for tax increment financing are not anticipated. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion; Zoning map amendment exhibit; Plat resolution; PUD ordinance; Official exhibits; Site renderings; Beltline Station area framework and design guidelines; Draft planning commission minutes from Sept. 1, 2021 Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, senior planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager Karen Barton, community development director Approved by: Cindy S. Walsh, interim deputy city manager City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 2 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Discussion Background: This site has long been held by the McCain family. During their ownership tenure, this area has undergone many changes from heavy industrial, to a business park, and in 2019 the city re-guided the property for transit-oriented development and rezoned it to MX-1 vertical mixed-use. The McCain family decided to sell this property and entered into a purchase agreement with Roers Companies who wishes to redevelop the site into a mixed-use, mixed-income, transit- oriented development for residents age 55 and older, which achieves the city’s goals and vision for the site based on city plans for the area. In 2012, the city created the Beltline Station area framework and design guidelines which identified Beltline Boulevard as a transit-oriented street since it is the primary north-south link for all transportation to the Beltline LRT Station. The plan states that development along Beltline Boulevard should “…focus on higher density buildings that bring more people, residents and employees, to live and work within walking distance of the Beltline Transit Station. Taller buildings for office, residential, and mixed-use (residential or office above retail) are appropriate along Beltline Boulevard/Ottawa [Avenue South]. All buildings on properties adjacent to Beltline Boulevard should be street-oriented with minimal building setbacks, entry doors and windows along the street.” Site information: City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 3 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Site area (acres): 3.29 acres Current use: business park uses – former Surrounding land uses: Comcast offices and fitness studios North: approved mixed-use building East: Bass Lake Preserve South: Wolfe Park Professional Center West: business park uses Current 2040 land use guidance Current zoning TOD - transit oriented development MX-1 vertical mixed use Proposed zoning PUD planned unit development Present considerations: The applicant requests the city: 1. Approve a preliminary and final plat. 2. Amend the zoning map and zoning ordinance to rezone the subject properties from MX- 1 vertical mixed-use to PUD - planned unit development. Preliminary and final plat analysis: Roers Companies seeks preliminary and final plat approval for the proposed redevelopment of a 177-unit, mixed-use building at 3510 Beltline Boulevard. Lots: Lot 1, Block 1, Belt Line Industrial Park 3rd Addition will have a lot area of 139,048 square feet or 3.19 acres. The proposed residential density for the site is 55.5 units per acre. Right-of-way dedication: The city is installing a multi-use trail along the west side of Beltline Boulevard in summer 2021. The property line will be relocated one foot west of the trail providing a clear demarcation between what is publicly and privately owned. The property line along 35th Street will also be relocated one foot away from the sidewalk that will be installed as part of the project. The plat dedicates right-of-way along Beltline Boulevard and along 35th Street. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan identified a future alley connection along the west side of the property from 35th Street West to 36th Street West. Seven feet measured from the alley centerline, which is half of the required alley right-of-way width, will be dedicated as part of the plat. Total right-of-way dedication is 4,955 square feet or 0.113 acres. Easements: The plat dedicates drainage and utility easements along all property lines. A five- foot wide drainage and utility easement is provided along Beltline Boulevard and all interior lot lines, and a four-foot wide drainage and utility easement is provided along 35th Street. Staff finds the preliminary and final plat meet city requirements. PUD analysis: Description: The developer requests approval of a preliminary and final planned unit development (PUD). A PUD is a rezoning and zoning text amendment that establishes the regulations for a specific property. The site is currently zoned MX-1 vertical mixed-use. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 4 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Building and site design analysis: City staff find the application meets the PUD ordinance goals for building and site design. The ordinance requires the city to find that the quality of building and site design proposed will substantially enhance aesthetics of the site and implement relevant goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning analysis: The following table provides the development metrics. The property is proposed to be rezoned to PUD. The proposed performance and development standards, as indicated in the development plans, establish the development requirements for this property if approved. Zoning Compliance Table. Factor Required Proposed Met? Use Mixed-use Mixed-use Yes Lot Area 2.0 acres required for a PUD 3.19 acres Yes Height None. 6 stories 70 feet Yes Building Materials Minimum 60% Class I materials on all facades Up to 10% of required Class I can be fiber cement East: 79% West: 84% South: 84% North: 78% Yes City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 5 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Dwelling Units No requirement Proposed 177 units Yes Inclusionary housing 10% of the units affordable at 50% area median income 10% of the units affordable at 50% area median income Yes Density (units per acre Transit oriented development Max allowed: 125 per acre 55.5 units per acre Yes Floor Area Ratio None with PUD 2.21 Yes Off-Street Parking 1 space per bedroom = 253 1 per 200 square feet for coffee shop = 20 20% reduction due to LRT/bus transit and shared parking Total required: 219 Parking garage: Commercial: 26 Residential: 214 Total provided: 240 Yes EV charging Stations Residential parking Level 1 = 22 Level 2 = 1 Conduit level 2 = 22 Commercial parking Level 2 = 1 Conduit level 2 = 3 Residential parking Level 1 = 22 Level 2 = 2 Conduit level 2 = 22 Commercial Level 2 = 2 Conduit level 2 = 3 Yes Bicycle Parking 1 per dwelling unit plus 1 per 10 automobile spaces. Total required: 201 Total Provided: 225 Yes Open Area/ DORA No specific percentage with PUD 38.3% Yes Landscaping Replacement diameter: 179 caliper inches New required: Trees: 177 Shrubs: 1,062 Replacement provided: 192 caliper inches Provided: Trees: 132 Shrubs: 1129 Alternative landscaping is provided Yes Setbacks No minimum required front, rear or side setbacks. East: 12.6 feet West: 9 feet South: 149 feet North: 11.8 feet Yes Uses: Risor is a mixed-use, multi-family rental development. The units include a combination of studio, one-bedroom, one-bedroom plus den, two-bedroom, three-bedroom, and live/work units. 14 units are live/work units and are a combination of studio, one-bedroom and two- bedroom units. The breakdown of unit type by building is as follows: City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 6 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Unit Type Summary Building Studio 1-bed 1-bed +den 2-bed 3-bed TOTALS Market rate 4 63 33 49 10 159 Affordable 1 7 4 5 1 18 Total 5 70 37 54 11 177 Inclusionary housing policy: The inclusionary housing policy requires any residential development that requests a planned unit development rezoning adhere to the city’s inclusionary housing policy. The developer proposes 10 percent of the units at 50 percent area median income (AMI). Per the Metropolitan Council, 50 percent AMI for a family of four is $51,700. Monthly rental rates at 50 percent AMI are presently $970 for a one-bedroom unit and $1,163 for a two-bedroom. Floodplain and wetlands: Portions of the site are located within the 100-year floodplain designation AE, per FEMA Flood Map No. 27053C0354. The building meets the requirements of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the city’s floodplain ordinance to have the finished floor elevation at least two feet above the base flood elevation. The base flood elevation on site is 879.5 feet above sea level and the finished floor elevation for a portion of the parking garage and ground floor units facing Beltline Boulevard and the green space within the floodplain, are located at 882 feet above sea level. An elevation certificate will be required to verify the building’s grade above the flood elevation. Additionally, all portions of the building located within the floodplain will be required to be floodproofed. Compensatory storage is provided onsite for portions of the building located within the floodplain. There is an existing wetland and a natural area with large trees on the south side of the site. These areas are being preserved and will be utilized for designed outdoor recreation area, stormwater purposes, and compensatory flood storage. Access: All vehicular ingress is provided off Beltline Boulevard. Commercial uses can exit via Beltline Boulevard or 35th Street West, and all residential egress is provided off 35th Street West. The proposed redevelopment removes two curb cuts along Beltline Boulevard, shifting the access drive south and away from the 35th Street West intersection. Commercial traffic will be directed to an open air covered commercial parking lot adjacent to the commercial uses and will exit via a curb cut onto 35th Street West. Residential traffic will be directed around the building to an enclosed two-story parking garage. Egress for the residential vehicles is from a second curb cut near the future alley connection. This alley curb cut will shift slightly west when the adjacent parcels redevelop to line up with the future alley connection on the north side of 35th Street West. Off-street loading is provided and accesses the property from Beltline Boulevard. This accommodates residential move-ins, delivery vehicles, and car sharing services. Trash service is located near the residential garage door. Pedestrian access is provided via 6-foot-wide sidewalks along 35th Street West, with a 5-foot- wide boulevard between the curb and the sidewalk. The city is installing a 10-foot-wide multi- use trail along Beltline Boulevard in summer 2021. The building will utilize this trail as City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 7 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. pedestrian and bicycle access for the site. Numerous trail connections are made along the length of the building, including two connections on the southern half of the site near the green space, and several stairs and a ramp connection along the Beltline Boulevard frontage. Additional pedestrian space is added on a raised sidewalk several feet above the trail to accommodate the floodplain. The building is required to be located two feet above the base flood elevation fronting Beltline Boulevard because Beltline Boulevard falls within the 100-year floodplain. Rather than providing six individual staircases along the street, the developer proposes a raised sidewalk adjacent to the building. Landscaping: The landscape plan indicates 96 new canopy trees, 36 new evergreen trees, and 1,129 new shrubs. The project does not fully meet the city’s tree requirements of one tree per unit. Code allows for alternative landscaping measures in order to meet the intent of the landscape ordinance including but not limited to outdoor fireplaces, outdoor space located on the roof and public art. Staff will work with the developer to ensure the development meets the intent of the ordinance as the outdoor spaces are further refined. Designed outdoor recreation area (DORA): There is no minimum DORA requirement for planned unit developments, but 38.3% of the site is designed as DORA. This includes the outdoor raised sidewalk that can be used as a gathering space, a large rooftop amenity with a swimming pool, pickleball court, and community gardens, and a sixth floor skydeck providing views of Bass Lake Preserve and downtown Minneapolis. Additionally, on the south side of the site is a large open greenspace, with walking paths and benches. A privately owned and publicly accessible trail will be constructed through this greenspace. Green building policy: The development will be required to meet the city’s green building policy and the applicant intends to use Enterprise Green Communities for their sustainability program. The developer proposes a photovoltaic array on the building’s roof and will be installing electric vehicle charging stations, indoor bike parking facilities for residents and guests, native plantings, and is exploring the addition of green roofs within the rooftop amenity area. The building will include LED lighting, low VOC materials, construction waste recycling, higher efficiency HVAC systems, low flow fixtures and recycled content material. In addition, the site is near the southwest light rail Beltline Boulevard station reducing the need for single- occupancy vehicles. Beltline station area framework and design guidelines: The Beltline Station area framework and design guidelines written in 2012, established a vision for the area as a transit-oriented community hub for jobs, neighborhoods, and recreation. The vision was supported by 10 guiding principles including: 1. Create a unique sense of identity for the Beltline area 2. Weave together the district Beltline districts 3. Increase street connectivity and mobility 4. Assure superior walking and biking accessibility 5. Foster the Beltline area as a growing regional employment center 6. Capture the value of transit 7. Promote transit-oriented development City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 8 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. 8. Create a network of great public spaces 9. Advocate for a convenient, safe, and pleasant transit station 10. Manage parking effectively. The properties fronting Beltline Boulevard were identified as being mixed-use with a pedestrian oriented street environment. The plan says buildings along Beltline should be sited to front the street and create a continuous, comfortable, and attractive pedestrian-oriented streetscape. Along Beltline Boulevard, which is identified as a transit street, a complementary mixed of uses should be allowed including retail/service and residential buildings, and the building should be designed to include street level uses that promote pedestrian activity and interest. The plan notes that “Taller buildings for office, residential, and mixed use (residential or office above retail) are appropriate along Beltline Boulevard. All buildings on properties adjacent to Beltline Boulevard should be street-oriented with minimal building setbacks, entry doors and windows along the street.” The plan provides guidance for building corners at primary intersections, which should be treated as prominent features, and encourages structured parking be located behind the primary building when with minimal curb cuts and driveways along Beltline Boulevard. The plan also encourages landscaped connections between private and public amenities and spaces, the use of native plantings, and encourages green roofs. The plan recommends stepbacks along Beltline Boulevard, pedestrian connections through the site, multiple changes in building materials, parapet height, and other elements which create variety in the building’s façade, consistent setbacks, a high percentage of transparency at the ground floor, and functional balconies to bring interest and “eyes on the street”. Staff finds the proposed development meets the vision, principals and design guidelines of the Beltline area framework and design guideline plan. Neighborhood meeting: A virtual neighborhood meeting was held on September 19, 2021. Approximately eight members of the public attended the meeting, not including staff, councilmembers, and representatives from the development team. There were two questions from residents in attendance, including questions about the number of trees being removed and the timing of the project. Councilmembers asked about on-street parking along 35th Street and whether the developer was looking to utilize natural gas or electric to heat the building. The meeting was recorded and is posted to the city’s project webpage. Planning commission: The planning commission held a public hearing on September 1, 2021. No public comments were made. The commission asked about live-work units and what differs between live-work and home occupation, racial equity goals of the development and developer, crossings and speed limits along Beltline Boulevard, and if this building and the recently approved development at 3440 Beltline will compliment each other. The commission voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat and the preliminary and final PUD subject to the conditions recommended by staff. Next steps: City council is scheduled to hold a second reading of the PUD ordinance on October 4, 2021. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 9 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Belt Line Industrial Park 3th Addition subject to the conditions detailed in the Resolution below. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary and final planned unit development for 3510 Beltline Blvd. subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved official exhibits, and city code. 2. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-site with materials consistent with the primary façade materials. 3. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met: a. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction, private utility, and city representatives. b. All necessary permits shall be obtained. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits, the following conditions shall be met: a. A planning development contract shall be executed between the developer and city that addresses, at a minimum: i. The conditions of PUD approval as applicable or appropriate. ii. Alternative landscaping requirements and tree replacement fees. iii. The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to, sidewalks, trails, boulevards and the execution of necessary easements related to such improvements. iv. Easements related to electronic communication and fiber infrastructure. v. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the amount of 1.25 times of the costs of all public improvements (sidewalks and boulevards), and the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. vi. The developer shall reimburse city attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final PUD approval. i. The mayor and city manager are authorized to execute said planning development contract. b. Final construction plans for all public improvements and private stormwater system shall be signed by a registered engineer and submitted to the city engineer for review and approval. c. Building material samples and colors shall be submitted to the city for review and approval. 5. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction: a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. Monday through Friday, and between 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 10 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. b. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. c. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. d. The city shall be contacted a minimum of 72 hours prior to any work in a public street. e. Work in a public street shall take place only upon the determination by the city engineer (or designee) that appropriate safety measures have been taken to ensure motorist and pedestrian safety. f. The developer shall install and maintain chain link security fencing that is at least six feet tall along the perimeter of the site. All gates and access points shall be locked during non-working hours. g. Temporary electric power connections shall not adversely impact surrounding neighborhood service. 6. Prior to the issuance of any permanent certificate of occupancy permit the following shall be completed: a. Public improvements, private utilities, site landscaping and irrigation, and storm water management system shall be installed in accordance with the official exhibits. 7. All mechanical equipment shall be fully screened. Rooftop equipment may be located as indicated in the official exhibits so as not to be visible from off-site. 8. The materials used in, and placement of, all signs shall be integrated with the building design and architecture. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 11 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Zoning map amendment exhibit City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 12 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Resolution No. 21-____ Resolution approving preliminary and final plat of Belt Line Industrial Park 3rd Addition, 3510 Beltline Boulevard. Whereas, Roers Companies applied for approval of preliminary and final plat in the manner required for platting land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder; and Whereas, the proposed preliminary and final plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park; and Whereas, the proposed plat is situated upon lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto. Now therefore be it resolved the proposed preliminary and final plat of Belt Line Industrial Park 3rd Addition is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk and subject to the following conditions: 1.The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved official exhibits, and city code. 2.All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-site with materials consistent with the primary façade materials. 3.Prior to the city signing and releasing the final plat to the developer for filing with Hennepin County: b.A financial security in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted to the city to ensure that a signed Mylar copy of the final plat is provided to the city. c.A planning development contract shall be executed between the city and developer that addresses, at a minimum: i.The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to, sidewalks, boulevards, trails and the execution of necessary easements related to such improvements. ii.A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park in the amount of 1.25 times the estimated costs for the installation of all public improvements (sidewalks and boulevards), placement of iron monuments at property corners, the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 13 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. iii. The applicant shall reimburse city attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final plat approval. iv. The mayor and city manager are authorized to execute the planning development contract. 4. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met: a. The developer shall pay to the city the park dedication fee of $265,500 and trail dedication fee of $39,825 for residential uses. b. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the City. c. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction, private utility, and city representatives. d. All necessary permits shall be obtained. e. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park for all public improvements (street, sidewalks, boulevards, utility, streetlights, landscaping, etc.) and landscaping. 5. The on-site underground storm water management systems shall be privately-owned and privately maintained. Access to the system shall be provided to the city for clean- out and inspection purposes when warranted. Access points shall be covered by a drainage and utility easement, as provided on the final plat. It is further resolved The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth have been fulfilled. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section 26- 123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council September 20, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 14 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Exhibit “A” Legal description All of Lot 1, Block 1, Belt Line Industrial Park 2nd Addition except that part thereof lying Easterly of a line 34 feet Westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the most Southerly corner of said Lot 1; thence South 59 degrees 15 minutes 24 seconds East on an assumed bearing along the Southeasterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said 1 a distance of 40.00 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 30 degrees 44 minutes 36 seconds East 112.38 feet; thence Northerly 768.57 feet along a tangential curve concave to the West having a radius of 785.30 feet and a central angle of 56 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds, and said line there terminating; also Lot 1, Block 2, Belt Line Industrial Park 2nd Addition, except that part thereof embraced within the plat of Wolfe Lake Professional Center City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 15 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. Ordinance No. ____-21 Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park City Code relating to zoning by creating Section 36-268-PUD 21 as a Planned Unit Development Zoning District for the property located at 3510 Beltline Boulevard. The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. The city council has considered the advice and recommendation of the planning commission (Case No. 21-28-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance Section 36-268-PUD 21. Section 2. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from MX-1 vertical mixed-use to PUD 21: Lot 1, Block 1, Belt Line Industrial Park 3rd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Section 3. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Section 26-268 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development Zoning District: Section 26-268-PUD 21 (a)Development Plans The site located on property legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Belt Line Industrial Park 3rd Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD approved Official Exhibits: 1.V001 Alta Survey 2. V002 Final Plat 3.P0.01 Preliminary Plat 4.C000 Cover sheet 5.A0.01 Concept floor plan level 1 6.A0.02 Concept floor plan level 2 7.A0.03 Concept floor plan level 3 8.A0.04 Concept floor plan level 4 9.A0.05 Concept floor plan level 5 10.A0.06 Concept floor plan level 6 11.A0.07 Concept roof plan 12.A0.08 Concept exterior elevations 13.A0.09 Concept exterior elevations 14.A0.10 Project images 15.A0.11 Shadow studies 16.C0.01 Site plan 17.C0.02 Site access plan 18.C0.03 Grading and erosion control plan 19.C0.04 Utility plan 20.L0.0 Tree preservation plan 21.L0.01 Landscape plan 22.L0.01 Landscape plan - color City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 16 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. 23. L0.02 Landscape schedule 24. L0.03 Dora plan 25. V000 Site lighting plan The Site shall also conform to the following requirements: 1. The property shall be developed with 177 residential units and a minimum of 4,000 square feet of ground floor commercial. 2. At least 240 off street-parking spaces shall be constructed. Up to a 20 percent reduction of required parking may be permitted for residential and non- residential uses under the terms of a parking management plan approved by the zoning administrator. 3. The maximum building height shall be 70 feet and six stories. 4. The site shall contain a minimum of 12 percent designed outdoor recreation area based on private developable land area. (b) Uses 1. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in PUD 21: a. Multiple-family dwellings. Uses associated with the multiple-family dwellings, including but not limited to, the residential office, fitness facility, mail room, assembly room or general amenity space. 2. Permitted with Conditions. The following uses are permitted with conditions in PUD 21: a. Live/work units. i. Live-work uses as defined by Sec. 36-142 of city code are permitted on the first floor. ii. A Registration of Land Use (RLU) shall be approved by the city when there is a change in commercial tenant. b. Commercial uses. Commercial uses are only permitted on the first floor, and are limited to the following: restaurants, coffee shops, office, private entertainment (indoor), retail shops, service, showrooms and studios. i. All parking requirements must be met for each use. ii. Hours of operation for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m. iii. In vehicle sales is prohibited. 3. Accessory uses: Accessory uses are as follows: a. Home occupations as regulated by this chapter. b. Gardens. c. Public transit stops/shelters. d. Outdoor seating. e. Public address (PA) systems are prohibited. f. Outdoor uses and outdoor storage are prohibited. g. Accessory utility structures including: i. Small wind energy conversion system as defined in 36-4 Definitions. ii. Solar energy systems. A solar energy system with a supporting framework that is either place on, or anchored in, the ground and City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Page 17 Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd. that is independent of any building or other structure; or that is affixed to or an integral part of a principal or accessory building, including but not limited to photovoltaic or hot water solar energy systems which are contained within roofing materials, windows, skylights, and awnings. iii.Cisterns and rainwater collection systems. (c)Special Performance Standards 1.All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking, and screening requirements. 2.All trash, garbage, waste materials, trash containers, and recycling containers shall be kept in the manner required by this Code. All trash handling and loading areas shall be screened from view within a waste enclosure. 3.Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the MX Zoning Districts and shall comply with the following: a.Pylon signs shall be prohibited. 4.Awnings. a.Awnings shall be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. b.Backlit awnings shall be prohibited. Section 4. The contents of Planning Case File 21-27-S, 21-28-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication (October 29, 2021) Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council October 4, 2021 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading September 20, 2021 Second reading October 4, 2021 Date of publication October 14, 2021 Date ordinance takes effect October 29, 2021 City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd.Page 18 3 5 T H S T R E E T W E S TB E L T L I N E B O U L E V A R D ST-19 IE:872.15 NW OCS-18 IE:876.10 NW IE:873.00 SE 15 LF - 12" HDPE@ 0.00%22 LF - 12" PVC@ 3.91%225.97' 319.49'328.29' 882.00' 880.00' 882.00' 882.00' 882.00' 880.00' 882.00' 2 A0.02 882.00' 882.00' 882.00' 880.00' 882.00' PROPOSED MIXED-USE BUILDING ± 82,000 S.F. FFE VARIES: 880.00 - 882.00 880 880 880 880 878878 878 879 881 88 1 8788791.46%1.64%1.60%4.91% 1.50% 1.53% 1.82%5.68%1.29%1.57%1.50%7.36%7.61% 1.50% 5.91% 15.47% 11.74%3.49%1.25%1.59%1.52% 1.30 % 3: 1 3:13:13:13:1 3:1 3 : 1 100-YR FLOOD ELEVATION BOUNDARY. EL: 879.20 PER FEMA FLOOD MAP NO. 27053C0354F 1.85%1.57%1.91%1.16% 4.95%1.48%1.50% 1.1 6 % 3: 1 4:11.69%875875880877879 880 880880880 875DD879.97 880.00 880.00 881.99 882.00 879.76 879.54 880.00 880.00 879.81 879.71 879.50879.64 878.93 878.34 878.30 878.90 880.00 880.00 880.00 877.19 877.09 878.10 877.94 882.00 880.00 881.93 882.00 882.00 881.84 878.55 880.88 878.39 881.66 881.73 878.23 878.26 881.98 881.83 881.42 879.60 879.82 877.71 877.66 877.97 877.91 878.09 878.14 879.05 878.22 877.72 879.13 879.17 881.84 879.63 881.66 879.91 879.88 881.17 878.33 880.49 880.30 OFFSITE DRAINAGE DIRECTION (TYP.) ..\Library\Images\ESG_Logo-AddressBlock.jpg Signature Typed or Printed Name License # Date PROJECT NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY ORIGINAL ISSUE: REVISIONS: KEY PLANNOT FORCONSTRUCTIONI hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota 7/17/2020160352000 BPG 3510 BELTLINE BOULEVARD 3510 BELTLINE BOULEVARD Saint Louis Park, MN 55416 PUD SUBMITTAL 8/25/2021 No.Description Date 2021 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM TRISHA D. SIEH 49848 8/25/2021 TDS 7/21/2021 NORTHEX0.02 PROJECT EXTENT GRADING PLAN EXHIBIT City council meeting of September 20, 2021 (Item No. 8e) Title: Mixed-use redevelopment proposal for 3510 Beltline Blvd.Page 19